-
Speech at the Fourth National Woman’s Rights Convention: “The Double Standard of Sexual Morality”
- The Feminist Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
157 speechatthe Fourth nationalWoman’s rights Convention:“the double standard of sexual Morality” October 7, 1853 Cleveland, Ohio At this convention Rose spoke several times, but her most eloquent and distinctive speech addressed the double standard of sexual morality for women and men. She spoke of the women who were ostracized and condemned by society for violating strict codes of sexual conduct, often as a result of being victimized by unscrupulous men, who themselves suffered no approbation of any kind. For Rose, such warped and hypocritical social conventions were symptoms of the general condition of inequality between men and women, which in turn was created by laws that were “framed in ignorance . . . sanctioned by superstition and enforced by power.” As the debate continued , she added “pulpit-preachers” to the list of those responsible. In her speech, Rose refers to a “declaration of independence” for women; this is the Declaration of Sentiments from the 1848 Seneca Falls convention, closely modeled on the U.S. Declaration of Independence. It had been read aloud earlier that day. Also mentioned is another declaration of women’s rights, which was included in a letter from reformer William H. Channing, also read aloud; it had been agreed that both documents would be drawn upon in creating a declaration for the present convention. Rose, in a sense, modeled woman’s resistance to the influence of men in her introductory remarks on the first day of the convention, urging women not to abandon their planned women’s rights meeting to respond to a last-minute invitation to an antislavery meeting. “We might congratulate ourselves that man has advanced so far as to invite a Woman’s Convention to attend his Convention; but surely it will not advance our cause to adjourn sooner, in order to meet his advances,” she declared. n [S]omething was said by one of my sisters, with regard to the statement [the Seneca Falls “Declaration of Sentiments”], that man purposely played the tyrant over woman. I trust that it is well understood—if not, I will repeat it as one of my views and principles, and I presume it will not be too presumptuous, to say, it is the principle of all the friends who advocate this cause; we do not fight with man himself, but only with bad principles. Man is inconsistent, and he has been made, through that inconsistency, tyrannical. Man has been unjust, because bad laws always 158 ernestIne l.rose will make bad men. We have had bad laws, hence man has been bad; but so thoroughly good is human nature, that in spite of bad laws, man is not as bad as he might be, under them. We make no complaint against individual man, for he is under the laws of the past; and humanity does not allow him to carry out, to the full extent, the bad provisions of the laws under which he lives. You will say, these laws were made by man. True! but they were framed in ignorance, ignorance of the ultimate end or aim of the human being, man or woman, and ignorance of the relations of the sexes. They were sanctioned by superstition and enforced by power. This is an additional reason why we wish all these laws altered, for it can be no otherwise than inconsistent, when one half of the race frame laws for the other half. Man is not now, in the full sense, man; any more than woman is, in the full sense, woman. It requires both to enact rational and proper laws for the rational government of both; and this is the reason why we claim our rights fully, fearlessly and entirely. I blame no one. My creed is, that man is precisely as good as all the laws, institutions and influences, [in] operation upon his peculiar organization , allow him to be; and therefore I see an additional reason and feel an additional motive, to point out our present laws and institutions. For so long as they are wrong, man will act unjustly; therefore we must have them altered. Remove the causes that produce transient effects, and the effects will not exist. But I heartily endorse the proposition offered here, to come forth with a declaration of sentiments. I second it as no less great, noble, and important, than the first honorable declaration of Independence ; those great immutable truths which have gone forth all over the world, and have given to man hope, and life, and light. Yes...