History, 19.10.2019 09:20, marialuis9115

Compare and contrast the arguments for and against women's suffrage in the early 1900s. include in your analysis of this debate how pro womens' suffrage advocates addressed the criticisms of anti-women's suffrage

Answers: 2

Show answers

Answers

I'll offer you some examples of arguments made, based on actual documents from 1911. Then you can do some comparative analysis.

Arguments advanced against women's suffrage ... Suffrage is a privilege, not a right. Politics is no place for a woman, so for women to be involved in politics is really no privilege for them Men have a responsibility to care for women, and guiding government is one of the ways men do that. They also go to war and will do whatever is needed to protect and benefit women. That's how we best give women a place of honor A woman's place is in the home, and from there she can best shape the future of the nation by guiding children there. Or women can guide children as teachers in schools Divorce and crime and other unwanted results will increase if we upend traditional roles and get women involved in politics God has assigned different roles to men and women, and we should respect those different roles.

Arguments advanced for women's suffrage ... Women and men are equal intellectually A democracy governs by the consent of the governed. Women are part of the governed, and so their active consent by voting should be sought If women rightly are involved in the governing of the home, why should they not have the right to be involved in the way the larger family--society--is governed?... In any states or countries where women have been given the right to vote, those laws have stood and have not been repealed. If such laws were mistakes, those states or nations would have pursued repeal Women who are informed and involved in regard to public affairs are not "less womanly," but actually make better companions for their husbands and teachers for their children.

answered: Guest

the correct answer option is: weapons.

explanation:

tensions rose as the two opposing superpowers competed for 'weapons'.

referring to the cold war (1945-1991), the two superpowers, usa and ussr, experienced a phase of struggle and conflict with each other. these two superpowers considered each other as a threat to their survival and thus opted for policies to strengthen their positions.

the two superpowers never went to war with each other directly but competed for weapons to preserve their positions.

answered: Guest

president carter called the victims of kidnapping "victims of terrorism and anarchy" and added that the united states was not going to give in to blackmail. in the united states, they see hostage-taking as an outrage on the part of the islamist movement that violated the principle of international law on the immunity and inviolability of diplomats and their embassies.

carter refused to yield to the demands, khomeini used the situation to consolidate his power and nullify the challenges of the moderate wing of his government, headed by its president. the euphoria over the humiliation of the most powerful nation distracted the iranian people from the economic difficulties of their country. carter, in april 1980, broke diplomatic relations with iran and imposed a trade embargo, except medicine and food. iranian funds in the us they were frozen and accounted for to compensate the hostages when they were released and to pay the demands of us companies against iran.