Previous, Next, Numerical Index, Chronological Index.
For All Nails #6:
Two Angry Citizens Per Distant Unit Per City 
Leading Editorial, New York _Herald_
14 April 1969
"A Step in the Right Direction"
Most of our readers have rightly paid little
attention to the convention of the Alliance
for Women's Equality in Brooklyn, concluded last
Wednesday. Our nation is not now ready, nor
may it ever be, for free love, free divorce,
communal creches for pre-school children, or
women practicing law. But we believe one of
the AWE's "demands", thought by some to be equally
preposterous, deserves serious consideration.
We were pleased to see that yesterday the Brooklyn
City Council followed through on Mayor Moishe
Levine's promise in his speech to the convention,
and thus that women will be allowed to vote in
the next municipal election in 1971.
Brooklyn is not like the rest of the NC, as the
many who travel there each year to obtain easy
uncontested divorces know so well. In joining Denmark,
Pushtunistan, and the Black Hills region of NV in
allowing women to vote, however, we believe that they
may be on the right side of history. After all, Negros
could not vote in the CNA at its founding, and today a
Negro leads us and only a few extremists think it unusual.
It has long been argued that only intact family units,
the basis of our society, should formulate that society's
will. Yet we extend the franchise to single men, and not
to widows with children, whose households are led by them
just as surely as in a normal family. It is argued that
men and women are not equal -- no reasonable man denies
this, but equality of ability is not otherwise required
for political equality. Men of little sense vote in every
election, but not the women who have proved themselves mistresses
of such fields as literature, journalism, nursing, and even
the piloting of military airmobiles in the ill-conceived
but largely successful Mason-era "demonstration project" .
Our rivals to the south use women's talents in more ways
than we do. The reforms of the 1910's allowed nurses to train
as physicians and surgeons, and after the mass education movement
of the last decade one in six physicians, one in eight surgeons,
and even one in twenty military field _medicos_
in the USM is a woman. Woman in Mexico also lack the vote,
not that it would mean so much in a sham one-party "democracy".
But hundreds of thousands of women there in technical academies and
universities are rapidly proving a useful resource in other
fields than medicine, even as most women still become wives and
mothers. In the long struggle that is the War Without War, we
too may need a variety of contributions from our women. And as we
demand these contributions, it is only fair to demand as well the
benefit of their judgment in choosing the men who will lead us.
(as is made clear in #6a, this entire post was based on my mistake
in ignoring the Sobel footnote indicating that women _did_ get the
vote in 1908)
 If you don't catch this reference you haven't played much
 According to FAN#1, the Royal Confederation Air Force Academy
has just been opened to women. This is fairly bizarre given what
Sobel tells us (by omission) about the public role of women in
this timeline, but then again Mason was a bizarre man.
[general] The only women mentioned in Sobel are Queen Victoria and
a few historians and journalists. This boggles my imagination --
unfortunately it's too late to ask him whether he forgot about
women's suffrage, or whether he had a reason why OTL's 19th-century
feminism didn't happen. I would love to have more speculation
from someone with more background, but conventionally feminism
in OTL followed economic factors with more industrial age jobs
open to women. (There is an Andersontown MA clearly meant to
be an analog of Lowell or Lawrence -- who worked there?) Of
course suffrage followed WWI in OTL, and further changes followed
WWII. The CNA had no analog of either, and as the editorialist
says the vote means less in the USM, which did.