|
Topics:
|
|
|---|---|
Words: |
1056 |
Pages:
|
2
This essay sample was donated by a student to help the academic community. Papers provided by EduBirdie writers usually outdo students' samples.
|
Cite this essay
Download
On the 3rd of August 1832, Mary Smith petitioned together with other women for the ability to voice their opinion in the election of the members of the parliament. This was the first women’s suffrage petition presented to the Parliament (British Library Learning, 2018). Throughout the whole 1800s women fought for their right to partition in politics, one of them was Susan B. Anthony. Anthony was born on the 15th of February 1820 and joined the women’s rights movement in 1852 (National Susan B. Anthony Museum & House, z.d.). In 1872 Anthony gave a speech on women’s right to vote. Nowadays voting for women is just as normal as men voting, however, at the time of Anthony’s life it was not deemed normal for women to be able to vote. Because of the cultural differences between our time and the 1800s, it is very interesting to see how the speech of Anthony would be perceived at different times. Therefore I am going to answer the question of how the speech can be interpreted differently by a man in the early or middle 1800s and a man from the 2000s.
Firstly I will discuss the interpretation of a man from the 1800s. When trying to interpret a text from a different perspective, you have to acknowledge the different cultures and values. The culture and values in the 1800s were drastically different from modern society. Women were seen as the weaker sex and they should submit to their stronger counterfeit, the male. The only purpose for women was to be a good housewives; meaning finding a husband, taking care of him, and giving him children. Women were completely depended on men and were confined to their own houses, they could not have a job or own any property unless their husbands allowed it (UK Essays, 2018), as illustrated in the speech from Anthony:”....this oligarchy of sex, which makes father, brothers, husband, sons, the oligarchs over the mother and sisters, the wife and daughters, of every household - which ordains all men sovereigns, all women subjects.....”.
Now onto the interpretation, in the first part of the speech, Anthony quotes the Preamble of the Federal Constitution 'We, the people of the United States, to form a more perfect union, establish..”. Anthony emphasizes the word “we”; “It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union.” She goes on remarking that the whole people and “we” include both men and women. As explained above women were subservient to men and were characterized as emotional and unintelligent and therefore were thought to make irrational decisions based on emotions, making them unfit to make important decisions affecting the whole country.
In the next paragraph, Anthony explains that women have no liberty in society, making them simple subjects for men to rule as they, please. Again it was believed that women would not only endanger themselves but also others with their irresponsible decisions. Thus, this paragraph may have come across as far-fetched with ungrounded arguments to a man from the 1800s.
In the last paragraph Anthony questions if women are seen as persons, she rightfully answers that everybody will say that they are persons. She continues that every person is a citizen and thus should have the right to vote. However, men argued that being a citizen had nothing to do with the right to vote, children were also citizens, but they were also not allowed to vote, again because they cannot make rational decisions.
Moreover, women were characterized as gentle and kind, making them fit to be caregivers. On the contrary were men characterized as harsh and tough, making them unfit to be caregivers. Voting would distract women from their first and foremost duty, namely being a wife and a mother (Oosterom, 2015). In conclusion, the speech by Anthony is unreasonable and unrealistic in the eyes of a man from the late 1800s.
Having considered the perspective from the 1800s, we now onto the perspective from the men in modern society. First of all, today's perspective of the role of women in society in the western world is drastically different. Women are seen as equal to men and therefore can vote and make rational decisions, women are independent and are the masters of their own lives. For men in the Western world, the speech from Anthony may thus be seen as unnecessary and logical. As Anthony says “For any state to make sex a qualification that must ever result in the disfranchisement of one entire half of the people, is to pass a bill of attainder, or, an ex post facto law, and is, therefore, a violation of the supreme law of the land”. A man from the modern Western world will agree with what she states and deem it completely normal. However, to this day there are still parts of the world where women are seen as inferior to men, mostly in Eastern countries like Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. Although women are allowed to vote, it is still very difficult for women to vote. Women are not allowed to leave the house unless they have permission from their husbands and are chaperoned by a male. Therefore, a lot of women are still not able to vote if their husband does not allow this. A man from a modern Middle Eastern country might therefore also deem the speech. Thus, the view of a man in modern society on speech depends on the country with different cultural values.
In conclusion, the interpretation of the speech by a man from the modern age and a man from the 1800s is different but also similar, depending on which part of the world you look at. A man from the 1800s will deem the speech foolish and irrational. A modern western man will most likely agree with the arguments used in the speech, however, a middle-eastern man is more likely to interpret the text as foolish and unimportant.
It was not until the 6th of February 1918 when the Representation of the People Act passed, that women over the age of 30 who owned a house were able to vote (BBC, 2018). Unfortunately, Anthony died on the 15th of March 1906 and therefore never saw her dream fulfilled (National Susan B. Anthony Museum & House, z.d.).
Get your paper done in as fast as 3 hours, 24/7.
Fair Use Policy
EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via support@edubirdie.com.
Stuck on your essay?
