Frederick Douglas

“When they are dragged from their houses and hung upon lamp-posts: when their children are torn from their arms, and their brains dashed out upon the pavement; when they are objects of insult and outrage at every turn; when they are in danger of having their homes burnt down over their heads; when their children are not allowed to enter schools; then they will have an urgency to obtain the ballot equal to our own.”

In this quote, Douglas is saying that it is more urgent for black Americans to obtain equal rights than it is for women and that the issue needs to be addressed first for blacks before it is addressed for women. He feels this way because he sees the everyday life of a black person as being more much more dangerous than the everyday life of a woman but society targets black people, inflicts more violence on them and has fewer reservations with doing so because blacks have fewer rights protecting their safety. Two examples he gives are the fact that black children are kept out of schools and the fact that black people are often pulled out of their homes and hung until dead for many reasons. He points these two things out among other things as examples of fears not faced by white women but are faced by all black citizens every day. Black children were denied an education and therefore had to work much harder to achieve a lower standard of living because not having equal rights meant they could be kept out of school simply because a particular community decided white people are better than black people. Blacks also had so few rights at the time that if black person committed a crime, was accused of committing a crime are just offended the wrong person for whatever reason, that person could be hung without a trial with little if any consequences to those committing the violent act. He recognizes the importance of women’s suffrage and agrees that it is necessary for women to gain equality, but also feels that the issue should be addressed for black people because in the meantime, blacks are fearing for their physical safety at any given moment and need these rights simply to survive where as women need these rights just to improve the quality of their lives.

I chose this quote because it illustrates just how difficult it was to be a black person I this time period with very clear cut examples. We have been talking about civil disobedience as a method to getting a point across and for a suppressed group that is sometimes the only way to be heard, however it was inspiring to read a passage where a black man was simply stating these horrifying fact to an audience and being heard without having to do something drastic to get their attention and get arrested in the process. It also relates to this week’s material because in the lecture it was said that blacks gained freedom and more rights long before women achieved the right to vote, however we all know that equal rights for all were not officially instated until the 60’s and even arguably to this day, some people and communities don’t recognize equal rights. I agreed while reading the passage that the group that was more in danger should get the political attention first but it would have more productive I think if the two groups stayed united throughout the whole movement as a campaign for equal rights for all citizens regardless of gender or race. They movement started off that way but for several reasons split into two more specialized organizations.

Susan B. Anthony

“And had your honor submitted my case to the jury, as was clearly your duty, even when I should have had just cause of protest, for not one of those men was my peer; but, native or foreign, white or black, rich or poor, educated or ignorant, awake or asleep, sober or drunk, each and every man of them was my political superior; hence, in no sense, my peer.”

What she is saying in this passage is that her trial was unfair and the way it was conducted was inconsistent with the principals governing how a trial should be run. She admits she has broken a law but has done so because it is an unfair law and the only way to show people how unfair it was as a law, was by intentionally and willingly getting arrested for breaking. But even when guilty, someone is supposed to get a trial by a jury of his or her peers. However because the people on her jury had more rights than she, they were by definition not her peers. The benefit of a jury of your own peers is to help ensure that there will be as little bias as possible because it is that much easier to be bias against someone who you hold yourself above. It is easier to discriminate against someone when society has rules in place that encourage discrimination. Having a group of men decide your verdict after being arrested for a crime that is only a crime in the first place because you are a woman seems unfair by design. At another point in the passage she talks about how her closing statement was the very first time through the course of this trial she has been given the right to speak for herself. In fact, during the closing statement the judge continuously interrupted her saying that the court could not allow her to continue, when giving a closing statement is another right that she is supposed to have. So even continuing to talk at her own trial was another form of civil disobedience because she was doing the opposite of what an authority figure was telling her to do and making a point of injustice in doing so.

I think it is a shame how unfair our so called sophisticated judicial system can be even to this day. Truly having a jury of your peers is something extremely difficult to pull off. It is hard enough getting a full twelve person jury of people who actually want to participate, let alone who want to be objective and fair at the same time. If I were on trial for something, I would want a jury of people who do not feel socially or politically separate from me. I want a jury of people whose verdict could affect their lives as well. Men convicting a woman for voting has no impact on their lives because it means nothing changes and they remain in the higher position on an uneven playing field. However, if a man was on trial for an act of civil disobedience, a lot more thought would have gone into that verdict for declaring him guilty could set a president and have an impact on the freedom of all other men, including the men on the jury.