Women’s Rights Emerges within the Antislavery Movement (II)
Reading: Kathryn Kish Sklar, Women’s Rights Emerges within the Antislavery Movement, 1830-1870 (New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000), 47-76.
In the second half of her introduction to this compelling volume, Sklar repeatedly suggests that the women’s rights movement, as it began to develop independently of the Garrisonian antislavery movement after 1840, became increasing “secular.” Although this argument has merit, it also obscures the extent to which basic Christian principles remained important within the movement.
To support her argument, Sklar emphasizes that Elizabeth Cady Stanton, in contrast to the Grimke sisters and Lucretia Mott, did not come from a Quaker background. Furthermore, as Stanton’s influence within the movement increased, she tended to focus more on the subjugation of women within the political and legal system. The “Declaration of Sentiments” that was approved by the Seneca Falls convention in 1848 provides a good example of the increasingly political vocabulary used by the proponents of women’s rights. (The fact that the document was modeled on the Declaration of Independence also speaks to this shift.) Sklar also notes that the women’s rights activists began arguing for their “co-equal” status with men, thus shifting away from the Grimke’s argument for equality based on the “moral being” of women (p. 64).
While these points are well-taken, they fall short of demonstrating secularization. One of the documents that Sklar points to as a special example of “increasingly secular language” (p. 180), Abby Price’s “Address to the ‘Woman’s Rights Convention’” (1850), was in fact pervaded by religious language. Price deeply rooted her claim to woman’s “co-equal” rights in God’s creation of humanity. Both men and women, she argued, were created in God’s image — and equally so. Price did not argue that men and women were “adapted to the same positions or duties, or that they are absolutely equal in physical and intellectual ability” (this was a common concession), but she stepped from her principle of “co-equality” to a claim that men and women are “absolutely equal in their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness — in their rights to do, and to be, individually and socially, all they are capable of, and to attain to the highest usefulness and happiness, obediently to the divine moral law” (p. 181). In short, Price continued to root women’s rights in spiritual and moral principles, even as she drew on the political vocabulary of liberalism.
Rather than describing this shift as secularization, it might make more sense to note the intertwining of ecumenical Christian notions of equality with a more secular political vision of rights. The women’s rights convention movement of the 1850s did indeed loosen its ties to a specifically Quaker and Garrisonian spirituality, but Christianity seems to have continued to play a central rather than a marginal role in the movement.
April 25th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Spirituality was a driving force in the women’s rights movement. They found scriptures written in the Bible and believed in self control. The women were gainng more control and had a choice when to have children as well. They had control of their bodies and also practiced abstinence. Some individuals believed in having sex 12 times a year. These all led to less children being born. The also believed in the temperance movement becasue money was wasted on the alcohol which could lead to gambling, prostitution and sometimes abuse of the wives. Society today is not focused on moral and spiiritual values, but they believe in science and technology leading to dagerous and material obsessions.
April 25th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
I believe that it was a process in both the spiritual way as well as the changing of the cultures. Women whom sat and congretgated together more than likely thought of why they saw themselves as “white slaves.” Some may even call this an epiphany or divine moment when they concieved this thought. Also, the women’s rights movement could not have been moved forward if it was not for the men in these women’s lives. Men who were this tolerant of these “radical women” left a big whole to be filled with women’s rights thoughts. These men were progressives before progressives.
April 25th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
I feel religion was still the driving force, but now they combined religion with documents such as the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. An example of this is found on. (p.80 middle of page) Maria Stewart is arguing for equal rights for all races and sexes by saying, “This is the land of freedom, The press is at liberty” then she goes on and states God doesn’t look or see anyone as an inferior race. In his eyes everyone is equal. Also, the women’s movement used the Bible to condemn this treatment as morally wrong.
April 25th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
The women’s rights movement may have come out of the anti slavery movement for many reasons but one may have been ego. If a black person was allowed to be free then they would be equal to white women as part of the second tier of the society in that time period. The women of the time as well as their husbands would not have wanted their wives to be just as good as a black person. Just because they were free didn’t mean they were equal and the women made the anti-slavery movement a benchmark for themselves and their rights as White women. They wanted to retain their place in the social hierarchy.
April 26th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
Many abolitionists faced the same problem, dealing with mob that apposed their point of view. Proslavery and racist Americans were the abolitionists biggest optical to maneuver around. But the women of the abolitionist movement were at a greater disadvantage; the women of the movement has one more optical to jump over; their sex. Although there were a number of women speaking against slavery the Grimke sisters has the most vigor and the sisters knew the harsh reality of slavery first hand, coming from an elite southern family. The Grimkes and other antislavery women set out to change the Untied State with their voices. The women’s voices fell on dead ears; ears that for the most part did not see women as equal. The antislavery women notice that they themselves were slaves of a society that only used them. The women’s movement sparked from here; when women realized they had to have the same rights as men to be heard by them.
April 30th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
I don’t think it could be emphasized enough that religious and morality values laid the foundation motivating the majority of these women to declare equality among the oppressed. The values and actions of these women go back to the Indian Removal Act, because they petitioned the government using their religious beliefs as a justification for their actions in a male-dominated society. During this time(1830s)the antislavery movement started gaining momentum, which many of the same women who fought for the rights of the Natives, now took a stand for those of the slaves. I think it is evident that religion was the initial driving force encouraging women’s involvement in the public sphere, especially when it came to declaring their own rights. The majority of them believed that all individuals were created in God’s image: equal.
April 30th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
I think it’s important to note that many of the women leading the antislavery and women’s rights movements were Quakers, or initially had Quaker backgrounds, such as Lucretia Mott, who not only was a leader for the antislavery movement but also was a key advocate for women’s rights, as she was the first to sign the Declaration of Sentiments in Seneca Falls. Also, when the Grimke sisters first went to Philadelphia they met some Quakers and wanted to become Quaker ministers themselves, which perhaps led them to become such influetial speakers because of the initial confidence and strength they gained through their gospel preaching. Same goes for Lucretia Mott, who also was a highly respected Quaker minister and, in fact, even though Elizabeth Cady Stanton wasn’t a Quaker, she would regularly go and listen to Mott preach because of the messages Mott brought, especially those of equality. The Quaker belief that all individuals were equal because everyone had the light of Christ in their souls, encouraged Quaker women, but also others, such as Stanton, to declare the equality they firmly lived by and believed in for all people regardless of their race, culture, or status. Again, it is obvious that religious convictions laid the foundation for women and men to defend the rights and equality of humanity.