Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:44 am Post subject: Post 2. 1/5
How was the early suffrage movement inspired by or connected to other movements -- abolition and temperance specifically? Did these connections impact early suffrage? How?
The early suffrage were linked to the movements that were trying to petition/change laws that restricted women from being independent, and also the movement of trying to abolish slavery. Getting involved with these movements really empowered the suffrage, because it allowed them to get experienced with fighting for what’s right. Like when women joined together to get petitions signed, also when women joined together in marching to fight against slavery. When the suffrage got involved in other movements it benefited them positively because they were making a difference as women. Like when women were on the side of trying to ban alcohol. They had valid reason to do so and the next step was to join the movement and take action, which they did. These connections had a huge impact on the early suffrage because it helped them progress with their problems of trying to liberate women as a whole. The marriage Act that they helped pass benefited women. When slavery was finally abolish, that also benefited women, more specifically black women. I really enjoyed this reading because it opened my eyes to the fact that they have to join other movement in order to make progress with their own. I felt this mainly when reading the Sojourner Truth part “Ain’t I a woman?” speech. Did anyone else feel that way when reading?
Also why didn’t the white women and black women work together during the time?
Helen's question was the same as mine. It makes no sense that there was discrimination WITHIN groups that were attempting to fight discrimination. I don't understand why groups of women fighting slavery for example, sometimes didn't allow blacks to join them?
The start of abolition movement inspired and paved the way for the suffrage movement. It was realized that there existed similarities in the way slaves and women were treated, and individuals who were activists for changing the roles of women in the America, also became activists for slavery. Women that worked to create a place for themselves in the church, began work for saving slave owners and slaves that branched from their religious beliefs. Their own roles as mothers and wives allowed them to sympathize with and understand the struggles of black female slaves raped and bearing children. One woman, Emily Collins stated "All through the Anti-Slavery struggle, every word of the denunciation of the wrongs of the Southern Slave, was I felt, equally applicable to the wrongs of my sex. Every argument for the emancipation of the color man, was equally one for that one a woman..." In other words, the struggle she experienced as a woman was the same as the struggles slaves experienced because of their race.
To answer the question posed by Asha and Helen, I think that black and white women were so divided within the current society that many women could not fathom working alongside them. Since black people were, at that time, considered an entirely different group of human beings, maybe white women felt that they didn't share the same life experiences that black women did. After all, it is usually easier to focus on our differences than to recognize our similarities. I think that, since there is strength in numbers, the early women's movement would have been strengthened had it been able to overcome racial boundaries. However, I think it was rare that white and black women interacted at all in their day-to-day lives, which prevented them from forming friendships and getting to know one another. Not only were their jobs segregated, but so were their schools, their home environments, their churches, etc.
Responding to the general question, I believe that the abolition and temperance movements helped the women's movement because they provided American women with their first opportunities to unite for a cause. Because both abolition and temperance received relatively little male support, the causes themselves insured women mostly single-sex environments in which to discuss their concerns. Like an affinity group, I believe that these conventions provided women with a sort of revelation that many of them had similar goals, and wanted to work to reform similar social justice issues.
I think Dicker clearly emphasis the notion that early suffragists and other women's rights activists (I hope this terminology is not considered overly anachronistic) felt connected to abolitionist notions as well as, in the case of my personal favorite, Mary Wollstonecraft, the notions of scientific enlightenment and democracy because they understood that slaves, and those oppressed by monarchy both suffered at the hands of "tyranny", or as Dicker refers to it "domination." Therefore due to this understanding suffragists and proponents of education for woman realized that a solution could not be reached unless the ideology of domination was eradicated as it applied to all oppressed peoples, regardless of the excuse for oppressing said group.
I think that economic status played a large role in the division between white and black women..well obviously. What I mean is that a white woman fighting for the rights of women would have been much more listened to, though a black woman on the other hand, is experiencing being both black and a woman in that time. Though specifically constrained to the early 19th century the packet said, "Although some white people sympathized with your condition as a slave, to many whites, you did not qualify as a 'true' woman because of your alleged lack of sexual purity." Though both the antislavery movement and the women's rights movement were fighting for the same basic rights, the division of the two was necessary in order to maintain a clear focus. Like what was said in class, to give total equality to everything can leave it all without value.
I found all the sources women activists used to prove the validity gender equality very interesting. Though one man used the bible to say why it is right to have this inequality, grimké responded using the bible to prove the necessity for equality of the sexes. It was also interesting that they used the declaration of independence for a model, though the cycle of inequality doesn't allow this political equality to be easily created. A group of women proposing something to benefit women to a group of all men doesnt seem very fair. But how is a woman supposed to be in that governmental group without gaining those rights in the first place. Well as history shows, it was done, somewhat.
I didnt really understand that "code of conduct" thing, anyone understand what it was/was used for?
Building off of Helen's post, I also found the "Ain't I A Woman" speech to be really interesting. I agree with what Hannah said about the strength in numbers. I think the white women felt that it was less likely for them to be listened to if they're trying to kill two birds with one stone here. Even though it was important for the black women to fight for their race and gender, whites most likely thought that bringing race into this fight over gender would make the argument even weaker and sound more unreasonable.
At the beginning of the reading on page 21, Dicker talks about "bluestocking". I thought it was strange in a way that women were "viewed with suspicion" if they simply wanted to learn more. From a man's point of view, though, I can see how further educating women in this situation might not be beneficial to the male population.
I found it ironic how females of the Indian tribe were respected for their work, when white females weren't supposed to be doing the "dirty work". The role of males really stuck out at me when i read this section, as I realized the major difference in power between females who live with their families and females who live with their husbands.
I enjoyed reading the section about the Grimke sisters because I just learned about the younger sister in Dissent last mod from reading one of her speeches. I had never heard of her before, but now she stands out in my mind as an important female in history. I hope we read more about her.
Questions: How do people feel about the number of children that women were having on average? What about the methods of dissent? (the forming of groups, coming together of people, speeches, etc)
Any thoughts on how some females thought it was polite to not be in charge of the "dirty" work?
It seemed from the reading that the main way the abolition and temperance movements influenced the fight for women's suffrage was simply through practice. Again and again Dicker emphasized that through experience women learned how to effectively fight for a cause. It was interesting how Dicker made sure to distinguish between temperance and abolition: "The work of abolition prepared future women's rights activists for agitating for an unpopular cause, one that would not be received well by the majority. Unlike more mainstream temperance reform, which also gave women experience in activism, antislavery work readied women for the hostile reactions of a public unprepared for a new way of thinking about women and their rights" (29). As the proverbial "they" say, practice makes perfect, and I'm sure that the time spent arguing for other causes provided invaluable lessons for the suffragettes.
I'm curious if people think it was a good decision to step back from the cause during the Civil War. I understand wanting to be respectful and thinking that "the time was not right for such activism," (3 but it almost seems as though it could have been an ideal situation for females to step up and take a more controlling role in social roles, with tons of the men away fighting.
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 6:34 am Post subject: God Help the Outcasts
Why black men were allowed to vote before white woman has always been a bit of an unanswered question to me. According to Dicker, women seemed pretty unable to organize until a political issue like abolition came about. What struck me the most, though, was the evolution of the idea of an outcast.
On page 22, Dicker explains that, prior to the anti-slavery movement "if you deviated from the norms of this cult of domesticity, you were considered an outcast." However, after women and abolitionists teamed up for a common cause, women were "prepared...for agigating for an unpopular cause, one that would not be received well by the majority" (page 29).
So my question is, is it now okay to be an outcast? What makes it okay after the female abolitionist phenomenon when it wasn't before?
How was the early suffrage movement inspired by or connected to other movements -- abolition and temperance specifically? Did these connections impact early suffrage? How?
It seemed like abolition and temperance really allowed women to find their voice. It hadn't really been made clear to them that their opinion wasn't welcome until they, well, tried voicing it. And as other people have said, women couldn't fight for these causes until they had the rights to fight for ANY cause. Until they had rights that didn't inhibit their presence in the public/political sphere, the basically couldn't hold any opinion at all. Its interesting to me that women discovered the injustices of their own position in trying to alleviate the injustices of others- I think that's a really, really nice example actually of human empathy/progression.
BUT anyway, this goes back to suffrage because I think women started to realize that there was a reason so much of the political push for both abolition and temperance came from members of their own sex because there was, in fact, a lack of a woman's opinion in the political sphere. That isn't to say that all women would vote the same or have the same opinion, but public dissent and demonstration is always a sign that a particular group of people is not being heard within a community. And of course they weren't being heard- they didn't have the vote!
Aside from all that, I think what you guys are talking about in terms of black and white women working together is really interesting, especially looking at it through the lens of certain current definitions of feminism we've come upon so far in class- because some were like "there are different kinds of women, we shouldn't expect to understand each other, and one cannot expect to separate her race from her sex so her experience will be different as a woman of color" (paraphrased from pg. 7 [this of course applies to all the other categories; sexual orientation, able-bodiedness etc]) while others say that sisterhood is so strong a bond it looks past and almost dissolves all those differences (paraphrased pg.15) while still others say that feminism must tackle EVERY ISSUE EVER, including racism and all the other isms (EVEN CAPITALISM) in order to be successful.
Oy. Thoughts?
How was the early suffrage movement inspired by or connected to other movements -- abolition and temperance specifically? Did these connections impact early suffrage? How?
I found this excerpt to be really interesting because I have never read such a complete view of separatism and basic lack of unity during what before I thought of simply as the suffrage movement.
At a time where members of one or more groups were seeking liberation, issues of race and gender got muddled and prioritized differently by different groups. White middle class women wanted suffrage and saw the collaboration with black woman as potential interference to their end goal of voting rights. Categorical black voting rights and female voting rights were practically viewed as mutually exclusive, leaving black women completely out in the old cold and with nearly no support. At this same time, black and white male abolitionists alike felt as if racial equality was the most important issue to alter politically, overlooking the reality of gender and gender differences within BOTH races. Once again, black women are left out to dry and white women generally ignored.
These connections, overlaps and often, oppositions, definitely impacted suffrage at this time---black suffrage and female suffrage. (Female suffrage being defined as the ability to vote for WHITE women). Granted, eventually black men were able to vote, as were white and black women. So from that perspective, eventually universal suffrage was achieved. Yet its upsetting and simply baffling that society, and by reflection, American government, put these groups in a "one or the other" scenario. Furthermore, even if the connections between all oppressions were realized, they were brushed aside in order to adhere to the limited choice offered at the time.
Its as if America had (and still does,) only a small allotment at any given time for change, and too much at one time simply WON'T be done.
All and all the reading was interesting, sad, and at many points hard to follow. Then main thing I realized was that history, for better or worse will repeat itself. It would seem in this country, race has always come before sex. The country was ready for black male voting rights before they were female voting rights..and now look at our president. Regardless of personal politics, I think its a strong reflection of our country that in a race of Hilary Clinton vs. Barack Obama, we chose a black president before a female one. This is a neither a good or bad thing in my opinion, just the way things are for now.
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:09 am Post subject: A reply to Helen's question
Hi, I know I'm late but I just wanted to respond to Helen's question of 'Why wern't the White women and Black women WORKING TOGETHER towards their similar goal of suffrage?'
I believe that they were not working together because those in charge of the women's groups which allowed white women in worried that the Black women's central focus would be towards the Black struggle rather than the gender struggle. This relates to our discussion yesterday in which a couple students came to the conclusion that it is impossible to stretch yourself to advocate and work for every social justice cause, and that you'll make more of a difference if you dedicate yourself fully to a single cause. I think the White women's groups felt that because the black women would not be able to separate their identity into "black" and "woman" they would instead appeal to only black women and also bring race into a discussion of gender. This seemed to be the biggest worry suffrage-supporters had with Sojourner Truth: that because she was Black that she wouldn't be able to support both Women's rights and Civil rights, and might preach about race in women's rights forums.
Like Lizzy, I have also always been interested in that Black men got to vote before any women. It somewhat makes me wonder because well into the twentieth century, black people were still considered by many to be inferior and mentally disabled, yet they got the vote before women, before even the most privileged of women, leading me to wonder:
What were women considered? If Blacks were compared to Apes, then where do women fit into said animal kingdom? It mentioned that using your brain was considered a waste of the energy which your uterus needed...so were women just considered brain-less bodies?
Also what did people think of the quote on pg 28 by Minister Grimkes pf MA: "The power of woman is her dependence" This description of 'woman' sounds kind of like a new pet puppy.
How was the early suffrage movement inspired by or connected to other movements -- abolition and temperance specifically? Did these connections impact early suffrage? How?
There was definitely a strong connection between suffrage and abolition which this reading made very apparent. Before the Civil War was over it seemed as if women’s attempts at suffrage did not come with much of an attempt at addressing racial inequality. After the war ended and it became obvious that slavery was going to be abolished women seemed to use it as a catalyst in order to force the government to address their issues with woman’s rights. On the other hand this could have been a coincidence because of the fact that most women activists started out addressing the issue of slavery.
I also thought it was interesting when the reading talked about the idea that women have to stay in their houses for fear that they will be corrupted by the outside world. It just seems like a simple but effective plot by males to keep women from rebelling and to ensure that their power will not be shared or lost. This also ties into what it meant to get married at the time. The idea that once married a woman no longer owned her body was just another way to keep women from becoming independent. Not until the textile factories was there even a hint of female independence.
My question is: why do you think that the government chose to withhold sex from the list of who has the right to vote?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
but it almost seems as though it could have been an ideal situation for females to step up and take a more controlling role in social roles, with tons of the men away fighting.
