Lucy Stone uses Kairos to encourage Suffrage Movement

Lucy Stone (photo credit)

May 1, 1893

In her speech to the Congress of Women at the Chicago World’s Fair, it is difficult to overlook the importance that Lucy Stone places on time as a factor in the Women’s Suffrage Movement.

Stone places importance on time as a symbol of improvement. Kairos, the importance of time in rhetoric, is upheld throughout the address in a then-now emphasis on events throughout history.

Three different situations are referenced in a then-now representative of improvements over time:

1.       Women’s pursuit of education

2.       Women’s right to free speech

3.       Women in the workplace

Stone opens the speech by speaking on education and the strides that women have made in being able to become intelligent and educated.

“It shattered the idea, everywhere pervasive as the atmosphere, that women were incapable of education, and would be less womanly, less desirable in every way, if they had it,” Stone said about the establishment of women’s colleges. “However much it may have been resented, women accepted the idea of their intellectual inequality.”

This is the first of the arguments that over time and with persistence, opinions can be changed. While many women had accepted that they were less worthy of an education, others fought to provide opportunities and were successful.

Second, Stone briefly alludes to the success of women in the anti-slavery movement. Building ethos, she associates herself with the Grimke sisters and others who spoke out against slavery. She suggests that while many became outcasts, it was eventually accepted that women, too, had a right to speak their minds freely.

“The right to education and to free speech having been gained for woman, in the long run every other good thing was sure to be obtained,” Stone said.

This argument outlines hardships and public criticism toward women fighting for rights, and is the second instance of improvements being made over time.

Finally, Stone comes to the more recent struggle faced by women being criticized for going in to the work force. Listing success stories case by case, she argues that women have overcome obstacles of all kinds to achieve independence and respect in the workplace.

“In Massachusetts, where properly qualified ‘persons’ were allowed to practice law, the Supreme Court decided that a woman was not a ‘person,’ and a special act of the legislature had to be passed before Miss Lelia Robinson could be admitted to the bar,” Stone said. “But today women are lawyers.”

This marks the third clear argument that achievements are being made in equality.

Stone’s structure of time in this speech is important. While most of the rhetoric of the movement uses kairos in a more intense form, this piece subtly encourages patience. Many speakers of the movement emphasize immediacy and call for action, but this address calls out the strides that have been made with patience and persistence. Just at a time when the movement may be getting frustrated with the lack of major results, Stone effectively encourages persistence by putting great importance on the strides made over time.

Thanks to persistence, many states will receive suffrage before the 19th amendment in 1919. 

Original image

Susan B. Anthony Arrested for Voting

June 17, 1873    

Found here

Miss Susan B. Anthony was arrested November 18 for voting in the Presidential election in Rochester, N.Y., on November 5.

The Vote
After joining together a group of 50 women, including her own three sisters, Anthony demanded to be registered as a voter in a Rochester, N.Y., barbershop on November 1. The demand sparked debate among the men and women at the scene, but eventually the women were allowed to take the oath of registry.

It is estimated that more than 14 women voted at West End News Depot on Election Day.

Anthony’s vote was accepted on November 5 after a vote from inspectors.

“Decide which way we might, we were liable to prosecution,” voting Inspector E.T. Marsh said of the decision to allow Anthony and the other women to vote.  “We were expected...to make an infallible decision, inside of two days, of a question in which some of the best minds of the country are divided."

Anthony wrote to fellow suffragist Elizabeth Cady Stanton shortly after voting expressing excitedment for her actions.

“If only now--all the women suffrage women would work to this end of enforcing the existing constitution--supremacy of national law over state law--what strides we might make this winter,” Anthony said. “But I'm awful tired--for five days I have been on the constant run--but to splendid purpose--So all right--I hope you voted too.”

The Arrest
A warrant for Anthony’s arrest was issued on November 14, but in an attempt to avoid a scene, arrest was delayed. Anthony refused to turn herself in to Police Commissioner Storrs.

“I sent word to him that I had no social acquaintance with him and didn't wish to call on him,” Anthony said.

Anthony was arrested November 18 and is being charged with violation of the Enforcement Act of 1870, which details voting without a right to lawfully do so. maximim penalty for the crime is a fine of $500 or three years imprisonment.

Other women who successfully voted were also placed under arrest, as well as the officers who allowed the women to vote on Election Day. The arrestees refused bail and were held in Commissioner Storrs’ office until release.

The Trial
Anthony’s trial is scheduled to begin November 29. Sylvestor Lewis and Eighth Ward Inspectors are scheduled to appear as the chief witnesses against Anthony.

Anthony will be represented by John Van Voorhis. Also to be tried are the voting inspectors who allowed Anthony and the other women to vote. 

The Impact
The decision of the court is sure to have a great impact on the Women's Suffrage Movement. If Anthony were to be found guilty of voting without lawfully being able to do so, the law will remain that under the Fourteenth Amendment, women do not have the right to vote. If Anthony is found not guilty, it is likely to be agreed that the Fourteenth Amendment does in fact grant women the right to vote and will allow them to do so in the future. 

Susan B. Anthony Argues for Women's Rights Using Antithesis, Rhetorical Question

January 1, 1871
Susan B. Anthony, in her address “as a representative of the working women,” argued that men should recognize women’s legal right to vote in America.

The president of the Working Women’s Central Association used antithesis in the beginning of the speech to outline injustices in double standards among men and women.

Susan B. Anthony (photo credit)

Antithesis, the use of contrasting situations, allows for a logos appeal to be made to an audience. The argument being made, that if men have a right to vote then women should also, is harder to refute when made obvious the social and political unfairness.

“It is because of a false theory having been in the minds of the human family for ages that woman is born to be supported by man and to accept such circumstances as he chooses to accord to her,” Anthony said. “She not like him is not allowed to control her own circumstances. The pride of every man is that he is free to carve out his own destiny. A woman has no such pride.”

Anthony also uses rhetorical question to refute the preconceived counterarguments to women gaining the right to vote.

“Nowhere can woman hold head offices and the reason is this, politicians can’t afford to give an office to one who can’t pay back in votes,” Anthony said. “If in New York the women could decide the fate of elections, don’t you think they could afford to make women County Clerks or Surrogate Clerks or even Surrogate Judges?”

By using a question with an obvious answer, Anthony forces the audience to recognize the flaw in the argument that women cannot be in office because they cannot bring in votes. She argues that more women with the right to vote allows for a better campaigning opportunity for those hoping to hold office, rather than an hindrance to the cause.

This use of question allows Anthony to transition her arguments to the politician’s need for women’s votes to gain the support of the working class.

 “No political party can hope for success and oppose the interests of the working class. You can all see that neither of the great parties dated to put a plank in the platform directly opposed. Both wrote a paragraph on finance, but nobody knew what it meant,” Anthony said. “They did this not because of a desire to do justice to the workingwomen, but simply because of the power of the working men to do them harm.”

This argument subtly suggests that women have more power to do damage than is currently known, instilling fear in the audience in a non-aggressive way.

Anthony finally falls back to rhetorical question, asking women to recognize the possibility that men are less inclined to protect women as a whole, and more inclined to protect their wives, daughters, mothers, and sisters as their “property.”

The use of rhetorical question throughout is successful because it implies that all of the tough questions have obvious answers. This strategy allows for women to look at the big picture as a question with a sure answer:

1.       Will women gain the right to vote? Yes.

2.       Should you join the cause to earn it? Yes.

Elizabeth Cady Stanton Uses Parallelism in Declaration of Sentiments

Elizabeth Cady Stanton, photo found here.

July 19, 1848

Suffragist Elizabeth Cady Stanton introduced a document in Seneca Falls, New York, bringing to light American history and the need for justice for women.

Throughout the document, Stanton alludes to the values held in the statements of the Declaration of Independence. The first paragraph of the speech uses language from the original Declaration in order to outline the explanation to follow.

“When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one portion of the family of man to assume among the people of the earth a position different from that which they have hitherto occupied, but one to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes that impel them to such a course,” Stanton begins.

The new Declaration maintains a parallel to the revolutionary document of 1776, using structure and language to show the similarities between the unfair taxation of Americans by the British and the lack of rights for American women.

“The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her,” Stanton said of the injustices toward women.

This approach to the argument is interesting, as it helps to build all three of the Aristotelian appeals.

photo credit

Ethos

Stanton builds ethos through her knowledge and application of American history to her cause. She exhibits patriotism and classic American values in order to prove that intelligent, educated women deserve rights promised to them historically.

Pathos

The appeal to patriotism and American pride allows for an audience connection throughout. Men want to uphold the justice of the nation, while women want to become a part of the government and American history. It also forces the audience to confront their emotions about the similarities between British tyranny and women’s suffrage.

Logos

Stanton creates a logical argument through parallelism, using a previously valid argument to make valid the argument that she presents. The deductive reasoning used by American forefathers also applies to the rights denied to women. If Americans were right to declare independence from Great Britain due to taxation without representation, then women are justified in demanding governmental representation as American citizens.  

The actual Sentiments section allows for the women at the convention to air their grievances to the government, an emotional vent that brings together a frustrated group. The use of parallelism in the Declaration of Sentiments not only allows for audience appeals, but allows for unity within the movement. The document, presented at the first Women’s Rights Convention organized by women, forced conventional thinkers to face the reality of a possible change.

“Now, in view of this entire disfranchisement of one-half the people of this country, their social and religious degradation -- in view of the unjust laws above mentioned, and because women do feel themselves aggrieved, oppressed, and fraudulently deprived of their most sacred rights, we insist that they have immediate admission to all the rights and privileges which belong to them as citizens of the United States,” Stanton said.

The final paragraph of the Declaration explains the goal of the document: to be given the same rights that are given to men. Stanton justifies the request by referencing the previously mentioned injustices. The document successfully argues for women’s rights through the use of a previously validated deductive argument. She receives 100 signatures on the document, 38 of which are men.