- Download PDF
4 Answers | Add Yours
There's a huge difference between what would be considered a typical or reasonable response in 1848, when the Declaration was released, and what a feasible or reasonable reaction would be today. In the time of the Seneca Falls Convention, the reaction from the media, men, government and society was one of amusement and dismissal, if they had even heard of the small gathering. While many Americans at that time, during the Second Great Awakening, saw a need to reform society to become something closer to Constitutional ideals formed after the Revolution, relatively few recognized the early women's rights movement as an area to concentrate on.
I think one feasible reaction to Elizabeth Cady Stanaton's Declaration of Sentiments speech was why she chose to model it after Thomas Jefferson's The Declaration of Independence. She clearly made a conscience effort to deliberately mirror one of America's founding documents, but as for her reasoning her speech does not give any specific explanation. In addition, I believe that Stanton wanted REACTION from her speech, regardless of how one came to the conclusion s of their reaction. For example, those within the suffragist movement probably interpreted Stanton's analogy as a fair and just argument to their cause. Those opposed to Women's Suffrage would be apalled at the analogy. However, Stanton definitely would agree that if there might be a chance that some of the opposition would be willing to accomodate the notion that her declaration held the same merit as Jefferson's it was worth the intention of that reaction.
There could be many possible "feasible" reactions to this declaration, depending completely on one's point of view.
For example, one reaction to this could be that it was a completely reasonable document, one that you support without qualification. After all, we believe that women should have things like the right to vote and the hold property and the right to be educated. So we should react to the declaration by accepting it completely.
Another way to react to it is to say that it was a document that was too far ahead of its time. We can react by saying that it asked for too much given when it was written. We can say that it was good as a declaration of what women should eventually have, but that it was too radical to be accepted immediately.
There are many other ways to react to this as well.
We’ve answered 320,559 questions. We can answer yours, too.Ask a question