Meta-Review: Susan B. Anthony - Racist, Manipulator? Who's Lying to You About Early Feminism?

MensNewsDaily.com ^ | 21AUG03 | Art Lemasters

[familyop]

Watchers are already making sure that no impropriety occurs in the libraries (that is, that no feminists get away with stealing/altering references). Scholars are digging for the rest of the truth (to expose early feminism for the evil that it really was) in those libraries right now.

[familyop]

PING. And ping others if you like it.

[LiteKeeper]

SPOTREP

[Ff--150]

fyi

[dr_who_2]

I've heard that suffragettes or other early feminists gave black women activists a cold shoulder. In the south, the suffragettes may have been enthusiastic for Jim Crow. All those white guys were "defending southern womenhood", don't you know. Personally, I imagine anyone who grew up in the south, didn't work or conduct business, rarely travelled (much less left their house or spent much time outside in direct sunlight), and was raised to be innocent, naive, and virtuous would never question the thinking behind Jim Crow or think about the humanity of those uneducated, subservient dark people who didn't dress very well. Your average suffragette was probably not a homemaker, but someone with too much time on their hands. But the end result of their efforts was for the best (electing Warren Harding doesn't count). It just took some time.

[Lorianne]

Using a strategy first suggested by Henry Blackwell, northern and southern leaders began to argue that woman suffrage--far from endangering white supremacy in the South--could be a means of restoring it. Indeed, they suggested, the adoption of woman suffrage with educational or property qualifications that would disqualify most black women, would allow the South to restore white supremacy in politics without "having to" disfranchise black men and risk Congressional repercussions.

It was a strategy that worked, and gained women the vote much sooner than had it not been used. The argument that allowing women to vote would add twice as many WHITES to the voting pool. The women's movement also floated the idea that women would vote in accordance with their husband's wishes, thereby essentially given white men two votes instead of one.

Enough MEN bought both strategic arguments that the 19th Ammendment passed. In short, they were suckered.

Politics is dirty business. Many men were and are miffed at the fact that women can play just as dirty as men to get wha they want.

Whether or not feminists were racist is immaterial. No doubt as many were as were men in any men's group. Great numbers of Americans (including men and women) were and are racist. Personally, I believe early feminists used racial arguments as a strategy ..... and a mighty sucessful one..... to gain the vote.

[familyop]

"I've heard that suffragettes or other early feminists gave black women activists a cold shoulder."

Yes, they did! That information is at some of the sites in
the cites and links in the piece. Except for Sojourner
(who in essence said that feminism was more important than
the 15th Amendment), the African-American women
rightfully split off from the early white feminazis.

There were slurs and other information that could have been
quoted, but the author did not want to recall anger to
anyone to the point where their day was messed up. But
there is a link to a lynching museum (with photos)
site--something we in the USA must never forget, IMO.

And Ward Connerly is right on with the RPI--a brave and
honorable man. It's time for a new direction in this
country--Americans, working together to make and keep
our country free! ...and the Republican Party to
continue with some of its better early roots. The Dems
were the worst when it came to racism.

[familyop]

Susan B. didn't do anything to bring the 19th. She hindered
it. Conservative people who remained faithful to the
Republican Party were the ones really responsible for
passing. Susan B. and her witchy friends only hindered
it by their "free love," man hating, anti-Christian,
racist and Marxist agendas. And they willfully set
temperance and the 15th back. Susan was also the
most radical kind of DV feminazi.

The documents disagree with the feminazi line and the
sanitized, filtered garbage being sent to our little
girls in schools and to our government publications.

Feminism is a branch of socialism and nothing more.

But the word going out proves all of this.

[familyop]

The man haters' sacred cow is being slaughtered by an
army of more honorable academics (more so than the witches
who've been censoring our conservative academics) as
we talk about it.

[Lorianne]

Whatever. You obviously have a personal vendetta against feminism that clouds your vision.

Women, blacks and everyone else rightfully got the vote which is the POINT of a representative democracy. One of the fundamental principles announced in the Declaration of Independence is that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Women made up 50% of the governed and were rightfully indignant at being snubbed. The 15th Ammendment should have covered EVERYONE, not just a small percentanage of the disenfranchised. Feminsists of the day did what they had to to ensure that women got their just rights under the precepts of our Constitution. The 15th had already passed. They didn't work to rescind it, they just wanted women (50% of the population) to be included in it. If they had to use pre-existing racisist and sexist attitudes in a ploy to get the vote, I'd say that was pretty smart (if dirty) politics. They co-opted existing dirty political tactics. Now some are upset that women have learned how to manuever politically (from watching men). It may not be pretty but it does work.

[familyop]

"You obviously have a personal vendetta against feminism
that clouds your vision."

You obviously haven't read the review and the referenced
pages. And real conservatives don't follow the likes of
Hillary in any disguise. They only launch the cries of
false victimhood in efforts to fool conservatives into
launching socialism via gobs of new bureaucrats against
what they describe as an epidemic of evil fathers and
men. ...all to destroy the family so they can have their
"sexual freedom."

Feminists make rhetorical noise without reason or facts.
The review is full of and linked to the facts.

[familyop]

The review touched a few nerves. That's a good thing.

[familyop]

Here. We're way ahead of feminist lurkers. The
following is from a strategist in an organization of
Republican voters ("Bob").

Quote:

---

Trying to anticipate the feminist dismissal of it (and dismissal will likely be their tactic of choice -- it's what they always do when faced with uncomfortable facts), I have a suggestion for the more detailed, follow-up article you said was planned. I expect they will try to excuse old Susie B by asserting that her opposition to the Negro vote wasn't racism at all, but a political tactic, an attempt to gain recognition of the alleged injustice of enfranchising black men, but not white women. Sort of a "but we should ALL have the same rights" kind of thing. They'll "prove" that by pointing out her work as an abolitionist.

---

[Lorianne]

Doesn't matter. What matters is everyone has a voice in politics. Whether or not you agree with them is another matter entirely. Not all women vote the same way. Not all feminists believe in the same things or vote the same way. That's the beauty of our system. A system we would not have if HALF our population could not vote.

[familyop]

But that's a straw man and completely beside the point of
the review.

[Lorianne]

I agree it was not the point. I was responding to your off-the-point diatribe against "socialism".

The point of the review is that (if) some early feminists were racist or used racist/sexists strategy ... or strategically allied themselves to certain groups to gain political clout, that this is supposedly discredits them. Well, if it does, it discredits every politician and politic activist from the beginning of time.

It's calld Politics. Women then and now know how its played. Maybe they read history books.

___ The Founders sold blacks down the river and appeased the slave-holding South in order to get them to join the Union. It's called politics. That's how the game is played.

___ Many of our Founders OWNED blacks as slaves. If we're going to discredit the ideals and views of racists, we'd be making a long list of ideals that have no merit .... including the ones our coutry was founded upon.

If we're going to indict ends justify the means strategy, then early feminists have plenty of company. I think what they did was rather smart. Since men were the only ones who could vote on whether or not women could vote, they appealed to men at THEIR level, using existing racist and sexist language.

It worked.

Obviosly when we look at history, we have to accept the good with the bad and look at the sum total of where we are NOW. We're the strongest freest nation on earth, in the history of earth. I'd say our not-so-perfect predecesors did a pretty good job all in all in bringing that about.

[familyop]

The sources behind the review refute that with facts.

[familyop]

Click on "1700s," early in the review.

[Lorianne]

Refute what?

[familyop]

Your whole statement and just about everything in it.