I was very, very isolated in the male-dominated, male-centered art world, and so I had to build a community because I didn’t have one

. I grew up in an environment where I was encouraged to stand up for myself and speak up.

These criticisms speak to second-wave feminism’s predominant focus on white, cis women’s experiences, and illuminate the important ways in which feminist thought has evolved over the past fifty years.

Chicago’s career has not been without criticism or controversy.

Indeed, Chicago’s work has been fundamental in bringing themes like women’s history, childbirth, and menstruation into the art world and larger cultural conversations.

When the right questions are asked about the conditions for producing art, of which the production of great art is a sub-topic, there will no doubt have to be some discussion of the situational concomitants of intelligence and talent generally, not merely of artistic genius

Indeed, in our time of instant communication, “problems” are rapidly formulated to rationalize the bad conscience of those with power: thus the problem posed by Americans in Vietnam and Cambodia is referred to by Americans as “the East Asian Problem,” whereas East Asians may view it, more realistically, as “the American Problem”; the so-called Poverty Problem might more directly be viewed as the “Wealth Problem” by denizens of urban ghettos or rural wastelands; the same irony twists the White Problem into its opposite: a Black Problem; and the same inverse logic turns up in the formulation of our own present state of affairs as the “Woman Problem.

The problem lies not so much with the feminists’ concept of what femininity is, but rather with their misconception—shared with the public at large—of what art is: with the naïve idea that art is the direct, personal expression of individual emotional experience, a translation of personal life into visual terms. Art is almost never that, great art never is. The making of art involves a self-consistent language of form, more or less dependent upon, or free from, given temporally-defined conventions, schemata or systems of notation, which have to be learned or worked out, either through teaching, apprenticeship or a long period of individual experimentation. The language of art is, more materially, embodied in paint and line on canvas or paper, in stone or clay or plastic or metal—it is neither a sob-story nor a confidential whisper.

On the contrary, by attempting to answer it, they tacitly reinforce its negative implications

Let us, for example, examine the implications of that perennial question (one can, of course, substitute almost any field of human endeavor, with appropriate changes in phrasing): “Well, if women really are equal to men, why have there never been any great women artists (or composers, or mathematicians, or philosophers, or so few of the same)?”

In the field of art history, the white Western male viewpoint, unconsciously accepted as the viewpoint of the art historian,

Like any revolution, however, the feminist one ultimately must come to grips with the intellectual and ideological basis of the various intellectual or scholarly disciplines—history, philosophy, sociology, psychology, etc.—in the same way that it questions the ideologies of present social institutions.

] In the US, notable leaders of this movement included Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Susan B. Anthony, who each campaigned for the abolition of slavery before championing women's right to vote.

In Britain, the suffragettes and suffragists campaigned for the women's vote, and in 1918 the Representation of the People Act was passed granting the vote to women over the age of 30 who owned property

Although feminist advocacy is, and has been, mainly focused on women's rights, some feminists argue for the inclusion of men's liberation within its aims, because they believe that men are also harmed by traditional gender roles.[

Originating in late 18th-century Europe, feminist movements have campaigned and continue to campaign for women's rights, including the right to vote, run for public office, work, earn equal pay, own property, receive education, enter contracts, have equal rights within marriage, and maternity leave

Dunham was not estranged from either ex-husband and encouraged her children to feel connected to their fathers.[44]

In Indonesia, Dunham enriched her son's education with correspondence courses in English, recordings of Mahalia Jackson, and speeches by Martin Luther King Jr. In 1971, she sent the young Obama back to Hawaii to attend Punahou School starting in 5th grade rather than having him stay in Indonesia with her.

She studied at the University of Washington from September 1961 to June 1962, and lived as a single mother in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Seattle with her son while her husband continued his studies in Hawaii.[18][26][30][31] When Obama Sr. graduated from the University of Hawaii in June 1962,[32] he left for Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he began graduate study at Harvard University in fall 1962.[21] Dunham returned to Honolulu and resumed her undergraduate education at the University of Hawaii with the spring semester in January 1963. During this time, her parents helped her raise the young Barack. Dunham filed for divorce in January 1964, which Obama Sr. did not contest

] At the age of 23, Obama Sr. had come to Hawaii to pursue his education, leaving behind a pregnant wife, Kezia, and their infant son in his home town of Nyang'oma Kogelo in Kenya. Dunham and Obama Sr. were married on the Hawaiian island of Maui on February 2, 1961, despite parental opposition from both families.[6][22] Dunham was three months pregnant.[6][16] Obama Sr. eventually informed Dunham about his first marriage in Kenya but claimed he was divorced. Years later she discovered this was false

While attending a Russian language class, Dunham met Barack Obama Sr., the school's first African student

On August 21, 1959, Hawaii became the 50th state to be admitted into the Union. Dunham's parents sought business opportunities in the new state, and after graduating from high school in 1960, Dunham and her family moved to Honolulu. Dunham enrolled at the University of Hawaii at Mānoa.

At the school, teachers Val Foubert and Jim Wichterman taught the importance of challenging social norms and questioning authority to the young Dunham, and she took the lessons to heart: "She felt she didn't need to date or marry or have children." One classmate remembered her as "intellectually way more mature than we were and a little bit ahead of her time, in an off-center way",[6] and a high school friend described her as knowledgeable and progressive: "If you were concerned about something going wrong in the world, Stanley would know about it first. We were liberals before we knew what liberals were." Another called her "the original feminist".[6] She went through high school "reading beatnik poets and French existentialists

According to Dunham, she was named after her father because he wanted a son, though her relatives doubt this story and her maternal uncle recalled that her mother named Dunham after her favorite actress Bette Davis' character in the film In This Our Life because she thought Stanley, as a girl's name, sounded sophisticated

The challenge was to move away from ethnocentrism, race stereotypes, and colonial attitudes, and to move forward by encouraging anthropologists to maintain high ethical standards and open minds.

During the development of anthropology in North America (Canada, United States, and Mexico),

While defining the division between what is cultural and what is social continues to be complex

Functionalism also struggles to explain why a society develops one particular kind of social institution instead of another.

They labeled these stages with terms such as savagery, barbarism, and civilization.[2] These theories of cultural evolutionism would later be successfully refuted, but conflicting views about cultural evolutionism in the nineteenth century highlight an ongoing nature versus nurture debate about whether biology shapes behavior more than culture.

The Navajo did not have a word for “disability” until they came into contact withAmericans (Kapp, 2011, p. 589)

Although doctors tell a mother that her sonwill never read or write,

The Dream Catchers Program also provides therapeutic horseback riding for people with autism.In a calm pastoral natural equestrian pasture, children with autism are able to learn tocommunicate with the horse (Ward, & Whalon, et.al., 2013, p. 2191).

Unfortunately, more than 80 per cent of adults with autism are unemployedglobally (2015, para. 11).

I studied ways that hunger experienced by Ifugao people is influenced by gender, ethnic, and class inequality, global and local health and development programs, religious proselytization, political violence, and the state.

I tell students during the first week of classes that one of my goals is to convince them that much of what they’ve learned about many familiar topics (race, sex and gender, kinship, marriage, languages, religion, evolution, social media, and globalization) is biased, or incomplete.

Observations of an impoverished health system in Dominica and family health experiences with dysentery during fieldwork led me toward medical anthropology and public health and so I completed a M.P.H. degree at the Harvard School of Public Health before receiving a Fulbright Fellowship to go to Benin University in southern Nigeria.

Although I am not calling for a mass return to foraging, when we consider the significant worldwide issues that humans face today—such things as global warming, the threat of nuclear war, accelerating ethnic conflicts, and a world population that has grown from one billion to nearly eight billion over the past two hundred years—we are left with difficult questions about whether 10,000 years of agriculture and a couple hundred years of industrialization have been in humanity’s best long-term interests.

One of the most important things that anthropology does is create a basis for questioning taken-for-granted notions of progress.

Through my anthropological training, I have made a career exploring how race influences our perceptions of popular music.

As it turns out, many people are ethnocentric to some degree; ethnocentrism is a common human experience. Why do we respond the way we do? Why do we behave the way we do? Why do we believe what we believe? Most people find these kinds of questions difficult to answer. Often the answer is simply “because that is how it is done.” People typically believe that their ways of thinking and acting are “normal”; but, at a more extreme level, some believe their ways are better than others.

The opposite of cultural relativism is ethnocentrism, the tendency to view one’s own culture as the most important and correct and as a measuring stick by which to evaluate all other cultures that are largely seen as inferior and morally suspect.

Anthropology itself is a holistic discipline, comprised in the United States (and in some other nations) of four major subfields: cultural anthropology, biological anthropology, linguistic anthropology, and archaeology.

Anthropologists are interested in the whole of humanity, in how various aspects of life interact. One cannot fully appreciate what it means to be human by studying a single aspect of our complex histories, languages, bodies, or societies

Medical anthropology is an example of both an applied and theoretical area of study that draws on all four subdisciplines to understand the interrelationship of health, illness, and culture.

He wrote that Hopi has no grammatical tenses to convey the passage of time. Rather, the Hopi language indicates whether or not something has “manifested.” Whorf argued that English grammatical tenses (past, present, future) inspire a linear sense of time, while Hopi language, with its lack of tenses, inspires a cyclical experience of time (Whorf 1956

Figure 9: From the moment they are born, children learn through language and nonverbal forms of communication.

! Human language makes it possible to teach and learn, to plan and think abstractly, to coordinate our efforts, and even to contemplate our own demise.

Archaeology   Archaeologists focus on the material past: the tools, food, pottery, art, shelters, seeds, and other objects left behind by people.

White privilege is believing that you have the right to tell anyone to leave the country they built with their own hands, for free.

And I get it; it is very uncomfortable for white people to hear about the atrocities of racism knowing that their people are complicit in centuries of mistreatment. It would give me the heebie-jeebies, too. It’s like cheating on a woman, confessing and then wondering why she’s always bringing up old shit when you come home late.

This is not about racists. This is about not-racists. You’ve seen them before: the special class of white people who say racist shit and do racist things but declare themselves the “least racist person you know.

Just want to remind everyone about the Documentary Report  13th that will be due on 11 NOV. Everyone will watch this documentary as it relates to this class and the subject of community organizing.  Write a 1 page paper for each event that you participated. Refer to the Documentary Report 1 Assignment Page for details

Your week 4 reflection format will slightly change. Please read the Weekly reflection # 4 directions carefully. We will also post our weekly assigned readings takeaways on our discussion board next week.

Then, when Day’s days seemed numbered, he decided to take a friend’s advice: publish a new, cheaper newspaper, one aimed at people for whom 6 cent papers were prohibitively expensive, people like the tens of thousands of New Yorkers he saw on the street and the thousands arriving by the boatload daily

Most commonly we didn’t quite know who we wanted to be or what we wanted to do. And really, at 17, 18 or 21 years old, who does?

When her mother married a white Cuban, Lena also learned that blacks can be very hostile to the white spouse, especially when the “black” mate is very light. At this time she began to blame the confused color line for her childhood troubles. She later en-dured much hostility from blacks and whites alike when her own second marriage, to white composer-arranger Lennie Hayton, was fi nally made public in 1950 after three years of keeping it secret

People who consider themselves of “mixed race” and experience some form of psychic stress be-cause they feel they have no identity in American society, perhaps more than most, need to have un-derstanding of this history. . . .

One of the more tragic aspects of the racial world-view has been the seeming dilemma of people whose parents are identifi ably of different “races.

56 SECTION I: Constructing Categories of Differencelonger possible. American society had made “race” (and the physical features connected to it) equiva-lent to, and the dominant source of, human identity, superseding all other aspects of identity. The problems that this has entailed, especially for the low-status “races,” have been enormous, im-mensely complex, and almost intractable. Constant and unrelenting portrayals of their inferiority condi-tioned them to a self-imagery of being culturally backward, primitive, intellectually stunted, prone to violence, morally corrupt, undeserving of the benefi ts of civilization, insensitive to the fi ner arts, and (in the case of Africans) aesthetically ugly and animal-like. Because of the cultural imperative of race ideology, all Americans were compelled to the view that a ra-cial status, symbolized by biophysical attributes, was the premier determinant of their identity. “Race” identity took priority over religion, ethnic origin, education and training, socioeconomic class, occupa-tion, language, values, beliefs, morals, lifestyles, geo-graphical location, and all other human attributes that hitherto provided all groups and individuals with a sense of who they were. The dilemma for the low-status races was, and still is, how to construct a posi-tive identity for themselves in the light of the “racial” identity imposed on them by the dominant society. In recent decades, one response to this dilemma on the part of some African Americans has been Afrocentrism (which is not the same as an older version of “Negritude” that black intellectuals had developed earlier in this century). And for some Indians a new form of “Nativism” has emerged, har-kening back to a Native American lifestyle. Afro-centrism seeks to reidentify with the peoples and cultures of Africa and to elevate Africans to a posi-tion of esteem by emphasizing valuable aspects of African cultures. Some Afrocentrists also make assertions about the positive qualities of African people and seek to recognize and objectify African-isms in the behavior of African-descended peoples who have been scattered all over the New World. Many assume or operate on the premise that all peoples who descended from Africans during the diaspora maintain certain behaviorisms that mark them off from other peoples. Their arguments seem of most colonies and transformed into property as slaves in a state of permanent bondage. Edmund Morgan (1975) also interpreted the ac-tions of the early colonists in the process of estab-lishing “racial” identities as stemming from the propertied colonists’ fear of poor whites and pos-sibly slaves engaging in rebellions together. Colo-nial leaders consciously formulated policies that would separate poor whites from Indians, blacks, and mulattoes and proceeded to provide the white poor, whom they had hitherto treated with contempt and hatred, with some privileges and special advan-tages. 4 In time, class divisions diminished in the minds of poor whites and they saw themselves as having something in common with the propertied class, symbolized by their light skins and common origins in Europe. With laws progressively continuing to reduce the rights of blacks and Indians, it was not long before the various European groups coalesced into a white “racial” category whose high-status identity gave them access to wealth, power, opportunity, and privilege. 5 By the mid-nineteenth century virtually all Americans had been conditioned to this arbitrary ranking of the American peoples, and racial ideol-ogy had diffused around much of the world, includ-ing to the colonized peoples of the Third World and among Europeans themselves.

We in the contemporary Western world have often found it diffi cult to understand this phenom-enon and assume that differences in skin color must have had some important meaning.

No structur-ing of inequality, whether social, moral, intellec-tual, cultural or otherwise, was associated with people because of their skin color, although all “barbarians” varied in some ways from the somatic norm of the Mediterranean world. But barbarians were not irredeemably so, and, as we have seen, nothing in the values of the public life denied the transformability of even the most backward of barbarians.

What seems strange to us today is that the bio-logical variations among human groups were not given signifi cant social meaning.

What was absent from these different forms of human identity is what we today would perceive as classifi cations into “racial” groups, that is, the orga-nization of all peoples into a limited number of un-equal or ranked categories theoretically based on differences in their biophysical traits.

Yet Christians, Jews, and Muslims had lived together in relative amity, and even inter-married, for several hundred years after the Muslim conquests and before the rise of the Christian king-doms to challenge Muslim power.

And various sects that developed within each large religious community complicated matters by fostering internal dissension and even warfare inter alia

One-third of the population of Athens were foreigners as early as the Classical period, fi ve hundred years before the Christian era (Boardman et al. 1986:222). And the city of Alexandria was (and still is) a heterogeneous, sophisticated, and complex community under the Greeks, Romans, Christians, and Arabs.

Peoples of different cultures coexisted for the most part without strife, with alien segments often functioning in distinct roles in the larger cities.

52 SECTION I: Constructing Categories of Difference When Alexander conquered peoples and lands all the way to the Indus Valley in India, interacting with “civilized” populations, nomadic pastoralists, settled villagers, and a variety of hunting and fi shing peo-ples, he exhorted his warriors to intermarry with the peoples they conquered in order to learn their lan-guages and cultures

Until the rise of market capitalism, wage labor, the Protestant Ethic, private property, and posses-sive individualism, kinship connections also oper-ated as major indices that gave all peoples a sense of who they were

That is that “ethnic” identity was not perceived as in-eluctably set in stone. Individuals and groups of individuals often moved to new areas or changed their identities by acquiring membership in a dif-ferent group. People of the ancient world seemed to have understood that cultural characteristics were external and acquired forms of behavior, and that “barbarians” could learn to speak the lan-guage of the Romans or the Greeks and become participants in those cultures, and even citizens of these states.

This research also contributes to our understanding of identity construction among biracial Latinos, a group often excluded from multiracial identity studies.

More generally, I examine how biracial young adults are choosing to assert their identifica-tion in the twenty-first century, and the degree to which hypodescent influences their choices.

Prior research that examines biracials’ labeling choices emphasizes the importance of family, peers, and environmental context, but gives little attention to the influence of nonracial social identities.

Group membership was especially stringent for people of mixed Afri-can ancestry, who were typically identified as singularly black (Davis 2001). Changes to the U.S. Census in 2000, however, which permit multiple-race classification, show that racial labels are no longer a disjoint construct in U.S. politics and culture

n a commonly told tale of Emily Brontë’s adolescence, Mary Taylor, in conversation with the Brontë sisters, vocalized her belief that religion was a private matter, the business of no one but herself and God

Montgomery’s ambitions to be a writer clashed greatly with the cultural norms that existed in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. Women could not vote, they could not own property, they did not go to college and they certainly could not be published authors!

‍ L.M. Montgomery was a prolific writer, and through her writing, an advocate for rights for women.

But like some jack-in-the-box, if you try to push her into a position, she’ll spring back with a view that doesn’t fit. Reality was always more complicated for her than ideas.

Here’s one on James Chettam’s attitude to Dorothea in Middlemarch: ‘Sir James had no idea that he should ever like to put down the predominance of this handsome girl, in whose cleverness he delighted. Why not? A man’s mind — what there is of it — has always the advantage of being masculine — as the smallest birch-tree is of a higher kind than the most soaring palm — and even his ignorance is of a sounder quality.’ With gentle irony Eliot satirizes the received wisdom about men’s minds, and the reader scarcely notices she’s done it.

She was intensely religious, but aged 21 she stopped believing in God.

t’s easy to forget, as we celebrate the 200th anniversary of her birth, how radical George Eliot actually was.

American journalist John Gunther visited Lambaréné in the 1950s and reported Schweitzer's patronizing attitude towards Africans. He also noted the lack of Africans trained to be skilled workers.

[edit] Schweitzer was nonetheless still sometimes accused of being paternalistic in his attitude towards Africans.

Schweitzer considered his work as a medical missionary in Africa to be his response to Jesus' call to become "fishers of men" but also as a small recompense for the historic guilt of European colonizers:[61] Who can describe the injustice and cruelties that in the course of centuries they [the coloured peoples] have suffered at the hands of Europeans?... If a record could be compiled of all that has happened between the white and the coloured races, it would make a book containing numbers of pages which the reader would have to turn over unread because their contents would be too horrible.

In line with early Christian notions, these “racial types” were arranged in a hierarchy: a great chain of being, from lower forms to higher forms that are closer to God. Europeans occupied the highest rungs, and other races were below, just above apes and monkeys.

Swedish taxonomist Carl Linnaeus divided humanity up into racial categories according to his notion of shared essences among populations, a concept researchers now recognize has no scientific basis. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain)

Over the next decades, Euro-American natural scientists debated the details of race, asking questions such as how often the races were created (once, as stated in the Bible, or many separate times), the number of races and their defining, essential characteristics. But they did not question whether races were natural things. They reified race, making the idea of race real by unquestioning, constant use.

As a professor of biological anthropology, I teach and advise college undergraduates. While my students are aware of inequalities in the life experiences of different socially delineated racial groups, most of them also think that biological “races” are real things. Indeed, more than half of Americans still believe that their racial identity is “determined by information contained in their DNA.”

A friend of mine with Central American, Southern European and West African ancestry is lactose intolerant. Drinking milk products upsets her stomach, and so she avoids them. About a decade ago, because of her low dairy intake, she feared that she might not be getting enough calcium, so she asked her doctor for a bone density test. He responded that she didn’t need one because “blacks do not get osteoporosis.”

Race is a highly flexible way in which societies lump people into groups based on appearance that is assumed to be indicative of deeper biological or cultural connections. As a cultural category, the definitions and descriptions of races vary.

George Francis Train was a wealthy philanthropist and controversial political figure of the 19th century who publicly questioned the integrity and the intelligence of black people and supported women’s suffrage as a means to “contain the political power of blacks (DuBois, 1978).

Sojourner Truth asserted that “There is a great stir about colored men getting their rights, but not a word about the colored woman; and if colored men get their rights, and not colored women get theirs, there will be a bad time about it.” The organization's fault lines began to show.

Stanton in particular argued that African Americans were ignorant of the laws and customs of the U.S. political system, and that it was "a serious question whether we had better stand aside and see 'Sambo' walk into the kingdom [of civil rights] first

In 1869, Anthony said, "The old anti-slavery school say women must stand back and wait until the negroes shall be recognized. But we say, if you will not give the whole loaf of suffrage to the entire people, give it to the most intelligent first."

Throughout the tumultuous second half of the nineteenth century, these friends, nearly the same age, butted heads more than once.

News of the death of Frederick Douglass reached Metzerott’s Music Hall in Washington, D.C., in the early evening of February 20, 1895. There, at a session of the National Council of Women’s triennial meeting, sat Susan B. Anthony. A reporter observed that “she was very much affected” by the news. After remarking on her usual “wonderful control over feeling,” the reporter continued, “last night she could not conceal her emotion.”[1] Just hours before his death, Anthony and Douglass had been in the same room. He had dropped into a morning business meeting of the National Council and stayed all day. In the days that followed until his funeral, Susan B. Anthony took steps to honor the memory of her friend in ways that reflected their shared values and dreams, things both personal and public.

Each sides felt betrayed by the other. Anthony and Stanton were disappointed that Douglass supported the Fifteenth Amendment after being a longtime proponent of women’s suffrage. They were frustrated that they were being told to wait even longer for the rights that they had spent decades fighting for. Douglass was hurt by the insults they levied against African Americans and their lack of support for African American causes.

Indeed, they sometimes argued that white women were more qualified to vote than Black men and allied themselves with opponents of Black suffrage.

Elizabeth Cady Stanton (left) and Susan B. Anthony (right) National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Object # S/NPG.77.48http://collections.si.edu/search/detail/edanmdm:npg_S_NPG.77.48 Some of those involved in the suffrage movement also divided over whether to support the Fifteenth Amendment, which would protect the rights of Black men but did not include women. Douglass strongly supported suffrage for women, but believed that the African American community had a more urgent need for enfranchisement.

. But while they shared many beliefs and goals, there were points of tension too. The Fourteenth Amendment passed in 1868 recognizing that people born into slavery were entitled to the same citizenship status and protections that free people were. However, because the amendment did not grant the universal right to vote, abolitionists and some suffragists withdrew from the universal suffrage campaign to focus on the enfranchisement (obtaining the right to vote) of Black men.

One case from the struggle for voting rights involved a split between the abolitionist Frederick Douglass and the women’s rights pioneers Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. For years, the three activists were close friends and worked side-by-side to pursue universal suffrage (the right to vote for all adult citizens) and the abolition of slavery.

Anthony and Stanton founded the American Equal Rights Association (AERA) and in 1868 became editors of its newspaper, The Revolution. The masthead of the newspaper proudly displayed their motto, “Men, their rights, and nothing more; women, their rights, and nothing less.” Also that year, the Fourteenth Amendment passed, recognizing that those born into slavery were entitled to the same citizenship status and protections as free people. The amendment did not, however, grant universal access to the vote. A rift appeared among those, like Stanton and Anthony and Frederick Douglass, who had been allies in the fight for universal suffrage. Anthony and Stanton were hurt that Douglass supported the Fifteenth Amendment, which granted the vote to Black men only. They felt he had abandoned woman suffrage. Douglass, in turn, was hurt by the insulting arguments of Anthony and Stanton against African Americans. They all thought that it would be impossible to get the vote for both women and African Americans at the same time, and disagreed with the others’ priorities. The rift turned ugly at a public meeting of the AERA held in New York City in 1869.

By 1856 Anthony had become an agent for the American Anti-Slavery Society, arranging meetings, making speeches, putting up posters, and distributing leaflets. She encountered hostile mobs, armed threats, and things thrown at her. She was hung in effigy, and in Syracuse, New York her image was dragged through the streets.

Meeting Elizabeth Cady Stanton was probably the beginning of her interest in women’s rights, but it is Lucy Stone’s speech at the 1852 Syracuse Convention that is credited for convincing Anthony to join the women’s rights movement.

In 1848 Susan B. Anthony was working as a teacher in Canajoharie, New York and became involved with the teacher’s union when she discovered that male teachers had a monthly salary of $10.00, while the female teachers earned $2.50 a month.

Early Women’s Rights Activists Wanted Much More than SuffrageVoting wasn't their only goal, or even their main one. They battled racism, economic oppression and sexual violence—along with the law that made married women little more than property of their husbands.

“I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.”

She ended up being fined $100—a fine she never paid.

Later the pair edited three volumes of History of Woman Suffrage together alongside activist Matilda Joslyn Gage.

The National Woman Suffrage Association

When Susan B. Anthony was denied a chance to speak at a temperance convention because of her gender, she was inspired to shift her focus to the fight for women’s rights.

The Anthonys were also part of the temperance movement, which attempted to cease the production and sale of alcohol in the United States.

The nineteenth amendment was known as the “Susan B. Anthony Amendment” to honor her work on behalf of women’s rights, and on July 2, 1979, she became the first woman to be featured on a circulating coin from the U.S. mint.

Susan B. Anthony (1820-1906) was a pioneer in the women’s suffrage movement in the United States and president (1892-1900) of the National American Woman Suffrage Association, which she founded with Elizabeth Cady Stanton.

Anthony spent her life working for women’s rights. In 1888, she helped to merge the two largest suffrage associations into one, the National American Women’s Suffrage Association. She led the group until 1900. She traveled around the country giving speeches, gathering thousands of signatures on petitions, and lobbying Congress every year for women. Anthony died in 1906, 14 years before women were given the right to vote with the passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920.

“Men, their rights, and nothing more; women, their rights, and nothing less.”

When Congress passed the 14th and 15th amendments which give voting rights to African American men, Anthony and Stanton were angry and opposed the legislation because it did not include the right to vote for women.

In 1848, a group of women held a convention at Seneca Falls, New York. It was the first Women’s Rights Convention in the United States and began the Suffrage movement.

She became an abolition activist, even though most people thought it was improper for women to give speeches in public. Anthony made many passionate speeches against slavery.

After many years of teaching, Anthony returned to her family who had moved to New York State. There she met William Lloyd Garrison and Frederick Douglass, who were friends of her father. Listening to them moved Susan to want to do more to help end slavery.

As Joseph Stalin raced to turn an agricultural backwater into an industrialized nation, his government downsized the week from seven to five days. Saturday and Sunday were abolished.