In her arguments against women’s right to vote, Professor Woodworth-Ney says that women are naïve and would be easily corrupted by chivalrous politicians. She adds that if women are given freedom to vote and join politics, the human race would die out because they would not give birth and have children. Many have found her views baseless and out of touch with reality. Considering the fact that she is a woman, her views are stupid to say the least. Though both the professors have one view in common, that is, they both want women’s rights, especially the right to vote to be respected, Professor Woodworth’s opinion and arguments against the same are different.
There is a trend in women’s suffrage movements. For example, in1848, the Liberty Party, composed entirely of men, made women’s suffrage their campaign plank. This is where the Seneca Falls Convention comes in. its significance is that it issued the first ever formal demand written by American women for suffrage. While still on the trend, in the 1850s, Lucy stone, the leader of National Woman’s Rights Convention organized petition campaigns against suffrage. In fact Stone became the first ever person to appeal for women suffrage before lawmakers. Later in the 1860s, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Julia Ward Howe followed suit. Their petitions were never violent, just in writing.
On the other hand, Professor Foner’s views were those of freedom for all, whether male or female. His views on equality of all echoes those of both of the professors discussed above. They all say that each human being, regardless of the sex must have equal rights. Both Professor Khulman and Woodworth-Ney criticize Professor Foner’s article in which he said that though women must have rights to vote, they should do it separately from their male counterparts.
Besides the right to vote, the other concern presented by both Professor Khulman and Woodworth-Ney is the right to education, decent housing, care of children and the right to join parliament. Yes these concerns were addressed. Therefore, given the professors’ comments and Foner’s text, the professor’s think that granting women the right to vote was evolutionary (a natural progression). Consequently, women’s lives have changed for the better in the 19th Century. For example, they now have rights which are protected in the constitution, the right to vote being one of them. Confidently, it can also be deduced that women’s movement was taking the right direction. They were fighting for women’s suffrage and rights.
