Paper Summary:

This paper explains that, in 1846 when the first convention for Women's Rights convened, women did not even have the right to speak out publicly and demand their rights. The author points out that the arguments, which justified the demand for women's suffrage, were (1) the "natural rights" argument that women were persons and justice was a natural right of personhood and (2) the "expediency" argument that women could carry out their roles more efficiently if they had the vote because their effect on the country would be to purify and lift up society into a more moral state. The paper relates that, between 1910 and 1920, middle-class black women became active in the cause; however, they could never overlook the issue of racism, which, for them, was not just a matter of being women because their color was a major cause of oppression.

From the Paper:

"Anti-suffragists argued that changing women's roles was a danger to society and to the stability of the family. They argued that because the family was the basic unit of society, women didn't need to vote because their husbands cast a vote for the whole family, a household vote. If women had the vote, they might vote against their husbands. This would destroy home and family and create anarchy. Women were not emotionally or mentally suited to the responsibilities of voting. They were sentimental and childlike and prone to hysteria. Women should be excused from the vote because it might ruin their purity and moral superiority."

Visitors who viewed this Essay also liked these:

• Research Paper # 35763 : "Women Suffrage"
• Research Paper # 100598 : "The American Woman Suffrage Movement"
• Essay # 68647 : "The Woman Suffrage Movement"
• Essay # 63551 : "Woman Suffrage"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: