One of the most interesting events of the past week, was the holding of what is technically styled a Woman’s Rights Convention, at Seneca Falls.
Please excuse me for saying this but why does there have to have men in attendance since this is a Woman's Rights Convention? Are the men feeling like they are missing something or perhaps a male dominance issue? Was Frederick Dougla.
It is, in their estimation, to be guilty of evil thoughts, to think that woman is entitled to rights equal with man.
Why does there have to be any difference between men and women? I believe that it should be equal rights for all human kind.
Many who have at last made the discovery that negroes have some rights as well as other members of the human family, have yet to be convinced that woman is entitled to any.
Why? If you were a white man you were treated regally. White women and black men were thought of in a negative fashion. If you were a black female, heaven forbid, you were just plain dirt with zero rights. Wrong.
Our doctrine is, that “Right is of no sex.” We therefore bid the women engaged in this movement our humble God-speed.
We have come a long way since this Woman's Rights Convention. I thank those woman for being able to voice how they felt and their help in making women on equal ground with men in decision making and politics. This paved the way for women to vote and hold office.
concomitant
a phenomenon that naturally accompanies or follows something. "some of us look on pain and illness as concomitants of the stresses of living"
novel
something is new, original, or different from what has been seen or known before. For example, you might describe an idea, suggestion, or way of doing something as novel.
In this meeting
I would have loved to been "fly on the wall" to see if the men in attendance had any affect on the outcome of the convention. Did the women feel pressured or free to state their opinions?
Among these was a declaration of sentiments, to be regarded as the basis of a grand movement for attaining all the civil, social, political and religious rights of woman.
I am glad that their feelings were put down in writing. My question is were these feelings their own or did they feel pressured into those feelings by Frederick Douglass and the other men in attendance?
slightest absence of good feeling and decorum
Even with a difference of opinion, I am glad that the women handled themselves with class.
will fail to give them credit for brilliant talents and excellent dispositions.
Must these women think the way the men thought in order to get credit? Is this why there were men there? The women were smart and I know angered about their enslavement and treatment just like the men.
it is but simple justice to say, that their whole proceedings were characterized by marked ability and dignity.
Simple justice? Article so far states "wholly conducted by women" which implies there was at least one male presenter. The other men what was their position within the convention? If "their whole proceedings were characterized by marked ability and dignity" Where was the women's ability and dignity since this allowed men to attend? This should have been labeled People's Rights Convention.
Why was there men at a woman's convention?