This essay, an expanded version of the presidential address presented to SHGAPE in April 2012, poses the essential question of whether the City can ever be a true site of democracy if women do not possess free, equal, and safe access to a city's public spaces. The essay compares the writings, proposals, and actions of men and women in the Anglo-Atlantic world early in the twentieth century to reveal the distinct gendered ideas behind various reform movements directed at improving the urban built environment. It uses theoretical frameworks provided by feminist historians and social scientists to demonstrate that from the Progressive Era to events of the contemporary Arab Spring, the city has not been a place of democratic equality for women. Fear of women's public presence, of the disorder of women, has motivated men to construct cities to reinforce their desires to embound women in the private domestic space and to punish women for transgressing the boundary between the public and the private.

Many political scientists and historians attribute the candidate-centered campaign, a defining characteristic of the modern American political system, to the appearance of the direct primary during the Progressive Era. During the nineteenth century, when the major parties selected their nominees in conventions, office seekers maintained a lower profile, and partisan-minded voters were not overly influenced by the personal characteristics of the candidates. Using California as a case study, this essay traces the emergence of a new breed of aggressive office seekers at the turn of the twentieth century. It looks specifically at the canvassing activities of would-be gubernatorial nominees in the weeks leading up to the state convention. In its heyday, the convention system marginalized elective office seekers. The multilayered convention system was too decentralized and complex to be manipulated in the interests any one candidate. Candidates began to exert more influence over the nomination process in the waning years of the nominating convention. The introduction of state regulation of party functions took control of the process out of the hands of local partisan clubs and cliques. Delegates began to be selected on the basis of their affiliation with a gubernatorial candidate. Conventions lost much of their deliberative character, and voting blocs emerged tied to particular candidates through the unit rule. By the time the direct primary appeared on the scene in 1909, the aggressive office seeker was already a fixture on the political landscape. In short, scholars have exaggerated the impact of the shift from indirect to direct nominations and have overlooked the implications of the regulation of political parties when the convention system was still in place. The direct primary was part of a long tradition of reform designed to serve the interests of the parties' office-seeking or office-holding contingent at the expense of the party organization.

Atheists are not the first group that comes to mind when one commonly thinks of late nineteenth-century southern Appalachia. Richard Lynch Garner (1848–1920), a self-taught scientist from southwestern Virginia who moved to southern Gabon in 1892, sought to bind together conventional southern middle-class views on race and manhood with religious skepticism. Studies of unbelief in the United States have almost entirely ignored the South as well as the ways that freethinkers engaged with race, thereby leaving out men like Garner. Though Garner drew on northern and midwestern freethinkers like Robert Ingersoll for critiques of Christianity, he also saw himself as a defender of paternal southern views of race from northerners and from Christian missionaries. Still, he distanced himself from other southern agnostics, especially the race-baiting William Cowper Brann, by presenting himself as a fatherly protector of Africans and African Americans. Garner used his observations on Gabonese societies to critique colonialism and missionary work as denials of biological differences between the races. Interestingly, Garner contended that Gabonese spirituality was materialist and lacked a notion of divinity. Ultimately, Garner downplayed his freethinking and his anti-colonialism in his published work—probably to ensure his ability to continue his research in colonial Africa and perhaps to better market himself in the United States.

In the early twentieth century, anti-white-slavery activists sought to construct a new position for women inspectors in the Immigration Bureau. These activists asserted that immigrant girls traveling without a family patriarch deserved the U.S. government's paternal protection, yet they argued that women would be best suited to provide this protection because of women's purported maternal abilities to perceive feminine distress. By wielding paternal government authority—marked by a badge, the ability to detain, and presumably the power to punish—these women could most effectively protect the nation's moral boundaries from immoral prostitutes while also protecting innocent immigrant girls from the dangers posed by solitary travel. In 1903 the Immigration Bureau launched an experiment of placing women among the boarding teams at the port of New York. The experiment, however, was short-lived, as opponents of the placement of women in such visible positions campaigned against them. This episode reminds us that the ability to represent and exercise federal authority in the early twentieth century was profoundly gendered; and women's increased participation in government positions during the Progressive Era was deeply contested.