Sarah Stanberry

Rhetoric of Women’s Movement

Amy Aldridge Sanford

RR3

February 7, 2007

The four readings assigned possessed the element of women desiring to be seen as humans, and therefore citizens. These readings emphasized the idea that women want to be citizens that hold the same rights as all others and therefor can be seen no differently from them.

Stanton’s document was confusing and somewhat contradictory. Stanton made me disagree with her when she stated throughout the article that women want to be more than a, “Subordinate position in the church” (p72). Stanton also continues by writing that, “. . . a perverted application of the Scriptures have marked out for her [indicating women as a whole], and that it is time she should move in the enlarged sphere which her great Creator has assigned her” (p73). I am confused by this and must disagree with Stanton’s opinion on the subject because Titus 1:6-9, of the Bible, clearly states that elders, meaning leaders in the church, cannot be women. A woman not being one of the leaders within the church is what the Creator has assigned women; it is not a perversion of the language.

Even though I had a disagreement with one of Stanton’s views, I cannot remove the outstanding thoughts within this work. Her ideals about, “. . . the world [possessing] a different code of morals for men and women” (p72) or “. . . the right and duty of woman, equally with man, to promote every righteous cause by every righteous means” are nothing short of brilliant (p73). What is even more spectacular is that Stanton formed it in such a way as to not only shock her audience but shows the injustices blatantly forced upon women.

Sojourner Truth’s article is thus far my favorite. Ain’t I a Woman? is my favorite because it does not come from a person with a traditional or formal education or a person with money, but rather a woman with enough common sense, instinct, and courage to speak against the evils oppressing her. I find it absolutely amazing that she does not think that “Intellect” (p79) has anything to do with equal rights. She seems to believe that giving women equal rights is simply the right thing to do, and therefore, it should be done.

Susan B. Anthony’s speech articulates her arguments in a linear fashion. Unlike Mary Wollstonecraft in her A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (p 64) who uses the “web” form to write, Anthony argues in a very linear way. I assume that Anthony pleads her case in the linear manner because men tend to think more in a linear way than women, and that was the audience she was appealing to at the moment.

Frederick Douglass’ article was intelligent yet so simple. Douglass possess the ability to place a striking idea in such a simple way that everyone can understand the argument and see the logic behind it. For example, “. . . seeing that the governments of the world have failed, it can do no harm to try the experiment of government by man and woman,” (p99) is such a brilliant idea put simply. I am amazed at Douglass’ thoughts on women in government. He seems to believe that women possess the right to be involved in government, not just because they are citizens, but because it would do the world good. I enjoyed the paragraph in which Douglass explained that women, if involved in government, could help resolve issues peacefully instead of resulting in war (p99).

Discussion Questions:

1. Do you think that women have established the rights of citizens? Why?

2. Sojourner Truth mentioned in her speech that “Intellect” had nothing to do with women gaining suffrage. Do you agree or disagree? Why?

3. Which assigned reading did you prefer? Why?