Saga - 2017, Blaðsíða 113

Hér hefur aðeins verið stiklað á fyrstu áratugum 20. aldar og því eru
ærin verkefni framundan. Á hverjum tíma er mikilvægt að greina
hvaða félagsbundnu breytur og valdatengsl ráða för og þar geta
aðferðir og kenningar samtvinnunar reynst notadrjúg rannsóknar-
tæki, eins og sýnt hefur verið fram á í þessari grein.
Abstract
þorgerður h . þorvaldsdótt i r
“UNFORTUNATELy, yOU ARE NOT REGISTERED TO VOTE”
Applying intersectionality as an analytical tool in historical research
The 2015 centenary of female suffrage in Iceland sparked interest in a more
detailed, intersectional examination of how the civil rights granted to women in
the first decades of the 20th century were affected and limited by various inter-
secting hindrances. The present study is novel in two ways. Firstly, since intersec-
tional historical studies have not become common in Iceland, it seeks to explain
the origins and objectives of feminist intersectional theories for domestic readers,
suggesting that the intersectional methodology of “asking the other question”
may prove rewarding for historical research. Secondly, for illustration, the article
applies feminist theories of intersectionality to examine how, during the first
decades of the 20th century, socio-cultural factors such as age, class, disability,
poor health, marital status, and motherhood (number of children) intersected
with gender to limit a women’s possibilities to participate in politics by voting in
parliamentary elections.
In the time around 19 June 1915, when Icelandic women gained the right to
vote and run for the Althing, two intersecting and restrictive aspects were in
place. On the one hand, women’s suffrage was severely limited by age, as they
had to be at least 40 while men only had to be 25, though male servants or
farmhands also had to be 40 or older. The imposition of these gender/age discrep-
ancies, unique to Iceland, was certain to diminish the number of new voters and
serve to maintain the status of those in power, i.e. middle-class men. However,
age restrictions were formally abolished in 1920. The second, longer-lasting inter-
sectional hindrance was socio-economic class. Poverty continued to be a stum -
bling block for suffrage, and until 1934 people who had received po verty relief
had no franchise.
A study of Reykjavik’s voter rolls for the Althing election of 1916 and of that
city’s poor relief records from 1910 to 1925 reveals that the relief was often needed
due to sickness or disability, old age, widowhood, or numerous children to care
for. Gender and class intersected in these aspects, shaping not only the living con-
ditions but also the political circumstances of many women (and some men) dur-
„því miður eruð þér ekki á kjörskrá“ … 111
Saga vor 2017.qxp_Saga haust 2004 - NOTA 18.5.2017 11:01 Page 111