Shoib 01

Critique
Zulekha Shoib

Professor Afsheen Salahuddin

SS 100 S18

7 November 2023

Critique: ‘On Women’s Right to Vote’ by Susan B Anthony

‘On Women’s Right to Vote’, a remarkable speech by Susan B. Anthony, served to be

a catalyst for the Women's Suffrage Movement which advocated for women's rights and

gender equality across the United States of America. Susan Brownell Anthony, a women’s

rights activist, played a pivotal role in the progression of gender equality and led many

campaigns aimed at resolving issues that deemed women inferior in society (The President

Speaks, 1954). She co-founded the American Equal Rights Association and the National

Woman Suffrage Association, through which she targeted many deep-rooted conflicts and

problems faced by women, such as the fundamental right to vote in presidential elections.

Susan Anthony faced harsh consequences of her adamance to working for women's rights:

arrests and trial, fines, and legal challenges as she ‘steeled herself against the condemnations

of newspaper editorials and outraged ministers’ (Women and Leadership: History, Theories,

and Case Studies 112). Her steadfastness and consistency throughout these challenges helps

establish the credibility of her speech since she was solely motivated to promoting women’s

rights, which is strongly reflected by her endeavors for this purpose. Through the address ‘On

Women’s Right to Vote’, Anthony has vigorously defended her stance on gender equality

regarding voting in presidential elections by targeting the constitutional framework, defining

the role of government in promoting inequality, and highlighting the hierarchal structure of

the constitution resulting in social relationships where men hold dominance over women.

Susan B. Anthony passionately argues over the conflict of women’s citizenship rights

specifically the right to vote in presidential elections. She begins the speech by repudiating
Shoib 02
Critique
her vote cast as being illegal, and promises to prove that her action was not illicit since the

National Constitution granted her citizen’s rights. Anthony reasons her stance by quoting the

preamble of the Federal Constitution whereby the “people of the United States” are instructed

to put their trust in the Constitution to maintain justice and stability. With regard to this

preamble, Anthony argues that while every citizen pledged their support to the Constitution,

it is unjust for only men to enjoy the privilege to vote in the elections. She emphasizes that a

government that deprives citizens of the liberty to vote is not democratic and republic, but

rather autocratic, and is responsible for exaggerating the differences between men and

women, mainly deeming men superior in terms of power over women. Anthony raises the

basic question of whether women are ‘persons’, and argues that if women are regarded as

citizens of the State, the debate over their privileges and right to vote under a democratic

system has a discernible resolution: women are fully entitled to vote in elections and all

forms of discrimination under the constitution are invalid.

The speech was delivered during Anthony’s trials as a consequence of failure to pay a

fine for casting an illegal vote in the presidential elections of 1872. Susan B. Anthony

recognized the shortcomings of gender inequalities during the 1800s and vocalized the

problems women faced through her speech: not only the legal implications, but also domestic

consequences. Therefore, it is suffice to say that the speech was relevant to the social context

of the time and successfully targeted atrocities faced by women at that time. Furthermore, the

speech was delivered by Anthony in a courthouse during a pivotal moment of her trial where

the issue of women’s rights was at the forefront of discussion. The audience included

influential figures, especially authoritative men, and such a setting further establishes the

relevance of her speech as her arguments would direct the audience to perceive the issue

differently. This is beneficial in establishing Kairos: a rhetoric defining the timeliness and

relevance to the social context of the time when the speech was delivered.
Shoib 03
Critique
The relevance of the speech in its social context can still be questioned. It is

imperative to note that the speech was delivered during Anthony’s trials, a time when the

authority demanded a justification of her actions and not an elaboration on women’s rights

and loopholes in the constitution. The speech can be regarded as an epiphany for the

oppressed, that is women, and its relevance would have been enhanced if it were delivered in

a larger social setting, addressing women so as to spread more awareness about their legal

rights.

Anthony presents the conflict between the constitution’s regard to women in the

union’s formation and the legal right to vote. She defends the argument by firstly persuading

the audience regarding women being considered citizens, and uses the federal constitution’s

preamble which says, "We, the people of the United States, …. do ordain and establish this

constitution…”. Anthony argues that “we” is not just limited to the “white male citizens” but

rather the “whole people” including men and women, of all races. It is inarguable that if

women are referred to, in the Constitution, as being responsible for establishing justice and

forming a more “perfect union”, they deserve equal rights as men in terms of “enjoyment of

blessings of liberty” by voting in the elections. Anthony backs this argument with strong

evidence from the preamble of the Federal Constitution, and reasons it by using similar

phrases from the preamble such as “blessings of liberty”, emphasizing on the fact that even

the Constitution does not explicitly deny the right to vote for women. This creates a strong

sense of persuasion since her logic is well-backed by such an intense reference to the

Constitutional framework itself, establishing logos in her speech, that is, logical reasoning.

Anthony uses appeals to logical reasoning by presenting historical allusions in the

form of examples of atrocities faced by women as a result of gender discrimination. She

claims that the government, a ‘hateful aristocracy’ is solely responsible for all social issues

such as gender and racial inequalities. By highlighting the atrocities faced by the Africans
Shoib 04
Critique
under the rule of Saxons, Anthony attempts to reason her arguments regarding the

government’s role as an oligarch. The mention of this historical allusion backs her arguments

in creating a negative and aristocratic image of the government. Moreover, she uses further

evidence regarding the cruelties faced by women, labeling men as ‘sovereigns’ and women as

‘subjects’. She highlights how men have superiority over women which is a true

representation of societal norms from the time of this speech. It can be observed that these

societal norms are also evident in speeches of other influential figures such as Elizabeth Cady

Station, a close acquaintance of Susan B Anthony and a women’s rights activist. “Every

allusion to the degraded and inferior position occupied by woman all over the world”

(Station, Address on Women’s rights 1948). These examples of injustice invoke a sense of

sympathy and the parallels drawn by Anthony, between the Africans and women, persuade

the audience into believing that women are truly being oppressed and deserve the basic

liberties of freedom.

Throughout the speech, Susan B. Anthony presented several arguments

backed up with strong evidence, as discussed before. These arguments include the debate

over whether women are citizens, the legal conflict of constitutional rights to vote, and the

present and historical implications of patriarchy and gender disparity. The speech is known

for its logical arguments; however, the existence of fallacies may weaken them. The

commencement of the speech is followed by the discernible use of straw man fallacy

whereby Anthony uses references from the Federal Constitution to debate over women’s right

to vote. She maneuvers the preamble in a way that simplifies her argument saying that “we”

refers to the “whole people- women as well as men”. This is a quintessential persuasive

technique used by Susan B. Anthony in her speeches, but it may divert the audience to a

contemporary debate: whether the constitution is truly a proponent of equal gender rights.
Shoib 05
Critique
The classic debate in this speech over whether women are considered citizens

has been answered by Anthony repeatedly throughout her arguments. She appeals to false

authority by stating the definition of a ‘citizen’ from ‘Webster, Worcester, and Bouvier’.

These sources seem to lack credibility with regard to the definition being cited since a legal

source, for example, from the constitutional framework would have established greater

reliability. Also, Anthony uses circular reasoning to exemplify her argument over women

being considered citizens because they are ‘persons’ and hence, deserve the right to vote.

This argument seems baseless since the assumption of women as citizens is questionable and

can be debated over. The utilization of such fallacies strongly persuades the audience as they

question the simplicity of this debate: if a woman is a person, she is also a citizen and

deserves the right to vote. This persuasion holds significant importance since Anthony’s

speech was imperative for the Women’s Suffrage Movement and its progress was boosted by

such debates where the beliefs of proponents were vigorously challenged.

The nineteenth century was a revolutionary era; resolving social dilemmas,

challenging deep-rooted beliefs, and metamorphosing legal boundaries regarding many

concerns, such as women’s right to vote. Inarguably, Susan B. Anthony was integral to this

progression and her speech is a reflection of this successful mission. Throughout the address,

Anthony’s use of pathos, a rhetorical strategy that appeals to emotions, is evident. She has

effectively attracted the audience’s sympathies towards women by her choice of words and

the use of figurative language. Anthony claims that the inclusion of women in the

constitutional framework, but exclusion from the right to vote is a ‘downright mockery’ as

they cannot enjoy the ‘blessings of liberty’ until they are allowed to vote. The use of the

metaphor of ‘blessings of liberty’ is crucial in this aspect since it establishes the importance

of the right to vote for women in terms of freedom. Labeling this right as yielding ‘blessings’,

makes the audience sympathize with women, portraying them as being deprived of happiness.
Shoib 06
Critique
Anthony uses hypophora, rhetorical questioning followed by an immediate answer, to

pose the question, ‘Are women persons?’ This figurative technique alarms the readers,

immediately riveting their attention. Such a simple question has only one answer: yes. It is

impossible to answer it with a no, therefore, the audience feels strongly persuaded by the

debate over women being considered citizens. Anthony has successfully highlighted the right

to vote as a basic right deserved by every ‘person’ and states that every discrimination against

women is ‘null and void’. This choice of words strongly entices the audience into believing

that this prejudice against women is baseless, and can be resolved easily by simply granting

them the legal right to vote.

Anthony creates a sense of urgency through the use of figurative language, strongly

appealing the audience’s emotions. By reading the address it seems as if the speaker calls for

immediate action to be taken in response to a critical social concern. She uses anaphora, that

is successive repetition of a phrase, throughout her address. The word ‘we’ is repeated as she

says, ‘it was we… we, the white male citizens…. We, the whole people’. This repetition

creates a sense of unity, as the audience is regarded as one, unified group, suggesting that to

overcome the problem of gender discrimination, everyone plays a vital role regardless of their

gender. Anthony further calls for action when she repeats the phrase ‘to them’ saying ‘to

them this government has no just powers… is not a democracy’. This repetition invokes a

dominant tone, which helps illustrate a powerful image: Susan Anthony, a representative of

women, confidently demanding the authority to grant them the right to vote. Furthermore,

this dominance is enacted through the use of alliteration while describing the consequences of

male dominance in society as it carries ‘discord’ and ‘dissension’. The repetition of the harsh

‘d’ sound creates an authoritative tone, and slows down the pace of the speaker, emphasizing

on the importance of the theme being presented: consequences of gender discrimination.

Shoib 07
Critique
The Women’s Suffrage Movement mainly led by Susan B. Anthony is often regarded

as the ‘first wave of feminism’ (Ruzdinksha, 18) and successfully revolutionalized the

position held by women in society. The significance of this speech is validated by the fact

that the 19th Amendment secured the right to vote for women in 1919 (Ruzdinksha, 18) and

suffice to say, Susan B. Anthony played a crucial role in this progress. This is efficaciously

evident through her speech: the dominance, clarity, and logically reasoned arguments.
Shoib 08
Critique
Works Cited

- Anthony, Susan B. “Is It A Crime To Vote?” Rochester Democrat and Chronicle.

1873.

https://www.historyplace.com/speeches/anthony.htm

- Anthony, Susan B. "Susan B. Anthony." The President Speaks(1954): 8.

https://cloudflareipfs.com/ipfs/
QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/
Susan_B._Anthony.html

- Anthony, Susan B. "Susan B. Anthony was a feminist leader and trailblazer for
women’s rights who spent ious." Women and Leadership: History, Theories, and
Case Studies (2016): 112.

https://books.google.com.pk/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=EWi9DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA110&dq=susan+b+anthony+and+femi
nism&ots=k1U6GPbilW&sig=RadRR9RhMQf4rNBKbeWlBLX512c&redir_esc=y#v=one
page&q=susan%20b%20anthony%20and%20feminism&f=false

- Station, Elizabeth Cady. Address on Women’s Rights. Seneca Falls Convention.

June 1948. Seneca Falls, NY. Speech.
https://bcc-cuny.digication.com/Culkinhis20hybridspring17/primarydoc5

- Rudzińska, Barbara. "The effect of the feminist movement on the position of woman
in contemporary American society." Ad Americam 1. 2000. p 18.

https://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/bitstream/handle/item/243084/
rudzinska_the_effect_of_the_feminist_movement_on_the_position_of_woman_2000.pdf?
sequence=1&isAllowed=y