ABSTRACT During the years immediately preceding the First World War Britain experienced mass social unrest on a scale not seen since the early nineteenth century. Despite their distinctive priorities of gender and class, respectively, both the women’s suffrage revolt for the vote (embracing suffragettes and suffragists) and the labour unrest of 1910–14 (involving strikes in pursuit of higher wages, better working conditions and trade union recognition) utilised dramatic extra-parliamentary ‘direct action’ forms of militant struggle from below that represented a formidable challenge to the existing social and political order of Edwardian Britain. Although the two militant movements effectively co-existed side-by-side on parallel tracks, with a huge and frustrating gulf between them, there were nonetheless some very important linkages between the struggles of women and labour that have often been missed, ignored or downplayed by feminist and labour historians alike. This article re-examines the historical record to deploy both new and previously utilised evidence to foreground neglected aspects of the subject, reveal fresh factual insights, and provide a more detailed than hitherto available assessment of the cross-fertilisation that existed between the women’s and labour movements and for the broader linking of class and gender issues, even if these were not always fully recognised, pursued or developed.

中文翻译：

---

第一次世界大战前的英国妇女选举权起义和劳工骚乱：永远不会相遇？

摘要 在第一次世界大战之前的几年里，英国经历了自 19 世纪初以来从未见过的大规模社会动荡。尽管她们分别以性别和阶级为优先事项，但妇女的选举权反抗（包括女权主义者和女权主义者）和 1910-14 年的劳工骚乱（包括罢工以追求更高的工资、更好的工作条件和工会认可）利用戏剧性的议会外“直接行动”形式的自下而上的激进斗争，这是对爱德华时代英国现有社会和政治秩序的巨大挑战。尽管这两个激进运动在平行轨道上有效地并存，但它们之间存在巨大而令人沮丧的鸿沟，尽管如此，妇女与劳工的斗争之间仍有一些非常重要的联系，而这些联系经常被女权主义者和劳工历史学家所忽视、忽视或淡化。本文重新审视了历史记录，以利用新的和以前使用的证据来突出该主题被忽视的方面，揭示新的事实见解，并提供比迄今为止对妇女和劳动力之间存在的交叉受精更详细的评估。运动以及更广泛地将阶级和性别问题联系起来，即使这些并不总是得到充分认识、追求或发展。