Let's continue our examination of Elizabeth Cady Stanton's
Declaration of Sentiments with points 9 to 12 done briefly, as these issues will be addressed with greater detail
later in this chapter.
 |
| Click Pic to read "The Declaration of Sentiments" |
9 -
After depriving her of all rights as a married woman, if single and the
owner of property, he has taxed her to support a government which
recognizes her only when her property can be made profitable to it.
10
- He has monopolized nearly all the profitable employments, and from
those she is permitted to follow, she receives but a scanty
remuneration.
11 - He closes against her all the
avenues to wealth and distinction, which he considers most honorable to
himself. As a teacher of theology, medicine, or law, she is not known.
12 - He has denied her the facilities for obtaining a thorough education - all colleges being closed against her.
.
---
.
To show that I am not
a horrible cretin of a misogynist,
I'm going to grant Elizabeth Cady Stanton her point number nine. I
wholeheartedly agree that a woman who owns property while single should
be allowed a voice if she is being taxed upon the property. This was the
basis for men having suffrage too, and indeed, this is how women slowly
on began getting more access to the vote - especially since women who
were widows owning substantial property holdings left behind by their
husbands paid hefty taxes indeed. Most of society thought this
reasonable as well, which is why women in such situations were soon
allowed to vote by proxy - they could send a man in their stead to
deliver their vote. (
Women were sometimes given the vote in various states or municipalities long before 1919).
Back in those days, voting was quite often violent, with union leaders
trying to intimidate voters and riots erupting at the polls. So, instead
of sending these women into the dragon's lair, they arranged for such
property-holding women to vote by proxy rather than in person.
Touché, Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
However, I'd like to remind her that Sparta fell because,
according to Aristotle, its faulty inheritance laws resulted in women owning 2/5 of the land - so, there's what we think is fair,
and there's what works.
The two need balance. I suspect women not holding property outside of
marriage,
as addressed in point six, would suffice to keep this in check
in our civilization because it would keep the number much smaller than
that which Aristotle claimed as the cause of Sparta's plummeting
birthrates. (How much of the population were widows and single women
back in 1848? Not that much.) Keep in mind this is a
legal right, not an "unalienable" one, which has been established earlier. Legal rights are about making society "function."
(
Read More Here)