Elizabeth Cady Stanton: Address on Woman’s Rights (1848)

Introduction

Born in upstate New York outside of the capitol city of Albany, Elizabeth Cady Stanton co-founded the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848, the first organized women’s rights convention in the United States. became a force for women’s rights. The convention had roots in the antislavery movement. Stanton married a prominent abolitionist, Henry Stanton. At their wedding, they removed the language “to obey” in their vows. They honeymooned in London to attend the World Anti-Slavery Convention in 1840. Initially, organizers refused admission to women. After winning the right to attend, the women delegates were seated at the rear of the hall on the condition they would not participate in the proceedings. In the uproar over these arrangements, Stanton met fellow abolitionist Lucretia Mott. They committed to holding a women’s rights convention upon their return to the United States.

Eight years later, in July 1848, they formed the Seneca Falls Convention and Stanton delivered her famous “Declaration of Sentiments,” a revision on the Declaration of Independence with specific reference to women. Also in 1848, she authored an “Address on Woman’s Rights.” In the speech, Stanton outlines her challenges to the idea that men are intellectually, morally, and physically superior to women. Whether a person agrees or disagrees with Stanton’s arguments, they were new, bold statements in the mid-nineteenth century, a time when women had few political, legal, and property rights. For example, it was not until 1920 that women gained a universal right to vote in U.S. elections.

Questions for Reflection and Discussion

• Across any of the categories–intellectual, moral, physical–what do you recognize in Stanton’s arguments that may be still debated today?
• How does Stanton discuss the biblical story of Adam and Eve to make her case about men and women?
• For Stanton, how have men suffered from views that women are more gentle, kind, and so on?
• What observations, name at least one, do you have about Stanton’s claims about physical equality?
• How would Danielle Allen respond to Stanton’s appeal to intellectual, moral, and physical equality?

Address on Woman’s Rights – Elizabeth Cady Stanton (excerpt)

Key: *** = excerpt

I should feel exceedingly diffident to appear before you, wholly unused as I am to public speaking, were I not nerved by a sense of right and duty—did I not feel that the time had fully come for the question of woman’s wrongs to be laid before the public—did I not believe that woman herself must do this work—for woman alone can understand the height and the depth, the length and the breadth of her own degradation and woe. Man cannot speak for us—because he has been educated to believe that we differ from him so materially, that he cannot judge of our thoughts, feelings and opinions by his own. Moral beings can only judge of others by themselves—the moment they give a different nature to any of their own kind they utterly fail.

***

Among the many important questions which have been brought before the public, there is none that more vitally affects the whole human family than that which is technically termed Woman’s rights.  Every allusion to the degraded and inferior position occupied by woman all over the world, has ever been met by scorn and abuse. From the man of highest mental cultivation, to the most degraded wretch who staggers in the streets do we hear ridicule and coarse jests, freely bestowed upon those who dare assert that woman stands by the side of man—his equal, placed here by her God to enjoy with him the beautiful earth, which is her home as it is his—having the same sense of right and wrong and looking to the same Being for guidance and support. So long has man exercised a tyranny over her injurious to himself and benumbing to her faculties, that but few can nerve themselves against the storm, and so long has the chain been about her that however galling it may be she knows not there is a remedy.

***

In every country and clime does man assume the responsibility of marking out the path for her to tread,—in every country does he regard her as a being inferior to himself and one whom he is to guide and control. From the Arabian Kerek whose wife is obliged to steal from her Husband to supply the necessities of life… from the delectable gentleman who thinks an inferior style of conversation adapted to women—to the legislator who considers her incapable of saying what laws shall govern her, is this same feeling manifested. In all eastern countries she is a mere slave bought and sold at pleasure. There are many differences in habits, manners, and customs, among the heathen nations of the old world, but there is little change for the better in woman’s lot—she is either the drudge of man to perform all the hard labour of the field and the menial duties of the hut, tent, or house, or she is the idol of his lust the mere creature of his ever varying whims and will. Truly has she herself said in her best estate.

***

In Christian countries, boasting a more advanced state of civilization and refinement, woman still holds a position infinitely inferior to man. In France the Salic law tells much although it is said that woman there has ever had great influence in all political revolutions. In England she seems to have advanced a little—  There she has a right to the throne, and is allowed to hold some other offices and some women have a right to vote too—  But in the United States of America woman has no right either to hold office, nor to the elective franchise, we stand at this moment, unrepresented in this government—our rights and interests wholly overlooked.

Let us now glance at some of the popular objections to this whole question. There is a class of men who believe in the natural inborn, inbred superiority both in body and mind and their full complete Heaven descended right to lord it over the fish of the sea, the fowl of the air, the beast of the field and last tho’ not least the immortal being called woman. I would recommend this class to the attentive perusal of their Bibles—to historical research, to foreign travel—to a closer observation of the manifestations of mind about them and to an humble comparison of themselves with such women as Catharine of Russia, Elizabeth of England distinguished for their statesmanlike qualities, Harriet Martineau and Madame de Stael for their literary attainments, or Caroline Herschel and Mary Summerville for their scientific researches, or for physical equality to that whole nation of famous women the Amazones.

***

Man superior, intellectually, morally and physically.

1st  Let us consider his intellectual superiority.  Man’s superiority cannot be a question until we have had a fair trial. When we shall have had our colleges, our professions, our trades, for a century a comparison may then be justly instituted. When woman instead of being taxed to endow colleges where she is forbidden to enter, instead of forming societies to educate young men shall first educate herself, when she shall be just to herself before she is generous to others—improving the talents God has given her and leaving her neighbour to do the same for himself we shall not then hear so much of this boasted greatness.

***

2nd  Let us consider man’s claims to superiority as a moral being.  Look now at our theological seminaries, our divinity students—the long line of descendents from our apostolic Fathers and what do we find here? Perfect moral rectitude in every relation of life, a devoted spirit of self sacrifice, a perfect union in thought opinion and feeling among those who profess to worship the one God and whose laws they feel themselves called upon to declare to a fallen race? Far from it.

***

In my opinion [man] is infinitely woman’s inferior in every moral virtue, not by nature, but made so by a false education. In carrying out his own selfishness, man has greatly improved woman’s moral nature, but by an almost total shipwreck of his own. Woman has now the noble virtues of the martyr, she is early schooled to self denial and suffering. But man is not so wholly buried in selfishness that he does not sometimes get a glimpse of the narrowness of his soul, as compared with women.

***

3rd  Let us now consider man’s claims to physical superiority. Methinks I hear some say, surely you will not contend for equality here. Yes, we must not give an inch lest you claim an ell [yard], we cannot accord to man even this much and he has no right to claim it until the fact be fully demonstrated, until the physical education of the boy and the girl shall have been the same for many years. If you claim the advantage of size merely, why it may be that under any course of training in ever so perfect a developement of the physique in woman, man might still be the larger of the two, tho’ we do not grant even this. But the perfection of the physique is great power combined with endurance. Now your strongest men are not always the tallest men, nor the broadest, nor the most corpulent, but very often the small man who is well built, tightly put together and possessed of an indomitable will.

***

We cannot say what the woman might be physically, if the girl were allowed all the freedom of the boy in romping, climbing, swimming, playing hoop and ball. Among some of the Tarter tribes of the present day the women manage a horse, hurl a javelin, hunt wild animals, and fight an enemy as well as the men. The Indian women endure fatigue and carry burthens that some of our fair faced, soft handed, mustachoed, young gentlemen would consider it quite impossible for them to sustain. The Croatian, and Wallachian women perform all the agricultural operations, (and we know what physical strength such labours require) in addition to their own domestic concerns; and it is no uncommon sight in our cities to see the German immigrant with his hands in his pockets, walking complacently by the side of his wife, whilst she is bending beneath the weight of some huge package or piece of furniture,—physically as well as intellectually it is use that produces growth and development.

***

We, the women of this state have met in convention within the last few months both in Rochester and Seneca Falls to discuss our rights and wrongs. We did not as some have supposed assemble to go into the detail of social life alone, we did not propose to petition the legislature to make our Husbands just, generous and courteous, to seat every man at the head of a cradle and to clothe every woman in male attire, no none of these points however important they may be considered by humble minds, were touched upon in the convention. As to their costume the gentlemen need feel no fear of our imitating that for we think it in violation of every principle of beauty taste and dignity and notwithstanding all the contempt and abuse cast upon our loose flowing garments we still admire their easy graceful folds, and consider our costume as an object of taste much more beautiful than theirs.

***

But we did assemble to protest against a form of government existing without the consent of the governed, to declare our right to be free as man is free—to be represented in the government which we are taxed to support—to have such disgraceful laws as give to man the right to chastise and imprison his wife—to take the wages which she earns,—the property which she inherits and in case of separation the children of her love—laws which make her the mere dependent on his bounty—it was to protest against such unjust laws as these and to have them if possible forever erased from our statute books, deeming them a standing shame and disgrace to a professedly republican, christian people in the nineteenth century.

And strange as it may seem to many we then and there declared our right to vote according to the Declaration of the government under which we live. This right no one pretends to deny. We need not prove ourselves equal to Daniel Webster to enjoy this privilege for the most ignorant Irishman in the ditch has all the civil rights he has, we need not prove our muscular power equal to this same Irishman to enjoy this privilege for the most tiny, weak, ill shaped, imbecile stripling of 21 has all the civil rights of the Irishman. We have no objection to discuss the question of equality, for we feel that the weight of argument lies wholly with us, but we wish the question of equality kept distinct from the question of rights, for the proof of the one does not determine the truth of the other. All men in this country have the same rights however they may differ in mind, body, or estate. The right is ours. The question now is, how shall we get possession of what rightfully belongs to us… The right [to vote] is ours, have it we must—use it we will. The pens, the tongues, the fortunes, the indomitable wills of many women are already pledged to secure this right. The great truth that no just government can be formed without the consent of the governed, we shall echo and re-echo in the ears of the unjust judge until by continual coming we shall weary him.

Source: Stanton, E. C. (1848, July 19). Address on woman’s rights. Archives of Women’s Political Communication, Iowa State University. https://awpc.cattcenter.iastate.edu/2017/03/09/address-on-womans-rights-july-19-1848/