Equating the women's movement to be singularly relevant to "liberals" says a lot about you. Sarah Palin is an example of the success of the women's movement, Condaleeza Rice is an example of the success of both the civil rights and the women's movements, they are both hardly liberal. Giving "blame" to the women's movement for the "victimization" of these women is also absurd given that part of the reason that laws exist to protect against sexual harassment, abuse, and rape is due to actions of the movement, including those which occur in marriages, which did not exist prior to the movement, it was legal for men to hit or rape their wives in a grim part of our history. The fingerpointing, if ...

Equating the women's movement to be singularly relevant to "liberals" says a lot about you. Sarah Palin is an example of the success of the women's movement, Condaleeza Rice is an example of the success of both the civil rights and the women's movements, they are both hardly liberal. Giving "blame" to the women's movement for the "victimization" of these women is also absurd given that part of the reason that laws exist to protect against sexual harassment, abuse, and rape is due to actions of the movement, including those which occur in marriages, which did not exist prior to the movement, it was legal for men to hit or rape their wives in a grim part of our history. The fingerpointing, if there is any to be done here, is the failure of our justice system if in fact there was rape and/or abuse here.
The women's suffrage movement was not just about liberals, or republicans, or anything in between and beyond, it was about human rights. It was not just women that participated. Any woman who lives as we do today that does not give a nod to John Mill and the suffrage movement for the rights we now so often take for granted, is not worthy of having them. Any man who wants to blame the women's movement as failing to protect all women, beyond the laws already instituted, is either misinformed, or a misogynist.