Friday, February 10, 2012

Enlightenment Ideals,The French Revolution & Women


Human rights shouldn't have to be bought, earned or even fought for; they belong to people simply because they are born. They are the same for everyone, regardless of ethnicity, gender, religion or political view, we are all born free. Therefore, human rights are universal. As T.H. Marshall put it, and I agree, human rights can be divided into three categories, or evolutions. First are civil rights. These include life, liberty and that all are born free. This first wave of rights also includes freedom of religion, opinion, assembly and other things of this nature. Second are political rights. Third, are social or human rights. This is about the right to equal education, the right to health care, the right to work etc. Further, all of humanity has the responsibility to respect others natural, human rights.Obviously in the course of history, and even today, this is not always respected. 
The Enlightenment ideals of “natural rights” led to questions about whose “nature” or “whose God” determines these human rights. At the time of the French Revolution, there was much division regarding the rights of slaves, the poor and women. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen of 1789 was approved by the National Assembly, a restructuring of the Estates General called by Louis XVI. The Declaration recognized basic human rights as belonging only to citizens who were male. In response to this, groups of women's rights supporters started a campaign for women's rights (Hunt 27). In 1790, Nicolas de Condorcet argued that human rights are universal, and should be extended to women (Doc 34). Etta Palm d’Aelders (Doc 35) also petitioned the National Assembly for civil and political rights for women. When the French Revolution didn't bring about acknowledgment of women's rights,  Olympe de Gouges published the Declaration of the Rights of Women and Female Citizen in 1791. She modeled her declaration on the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen, took each article the national assembly pronounced and rewrote it to include women. It follows the 17 articles point for point. For example, the first article declares "men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be based only on common utility" (Doc 14). The First Article of the Declaration of Rights of Women and Female Citizen reads, "Woman is born free and remained equal to man in rights. Social distinctions may only be based on common utility" (Doc 36).For her views, and daring to speak out, she along with other female activists suffered abuse from the government (Hunt 27). 
The prevailing attitude, was to denounce women's political activism. Pierre Gaspard Chaumette , who denounced slavery, did not include women in his view of political rights. He called those women seeking these basic human rights, "Viragos [noisy, domineering; Amazons]" and said they were “denatured women" seeking to "soil this line of liberty… and were “shameless" (Doc 40). The documents exemplify the way the French Revolution treated women. Most of these women activists were arrested, however Gouges was sent to the guillotine in 1793 ( Hunt 27). It would take women another 150 years to win equal rights. The grounds? “Nature” as Chaumette made clear (Wright, Lecture 4, & Doc 40).

Work Cited:
Chaumette, Pierre Gaspard, Speech at the General Council of the City Government of Paris Denouncing Women’s Political Activism November 17, 1793(Document 40)

Condorcet, On the Admission of Women to the Rights of Citizenship, July 1790 (Document 34)

D’Aelders, Etta Palm, Discourse on the Injustice of the Laws in Favor of Men, at the Expense of Women, December 30, 1790 (Document 35)

Declaration of the rights of Man and Citizen August 26, 1789 (Document 14)

De Gouges, Olympe, Declaration of the Rights of Women, September 1791 (Document 36)

Hunt, Lynn. The French Revolution and Human Rights. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 1996.

7 comments:

  1. I take it that you believe that human rights exist as things to which all people are entitled by "God or Nature's god), as opposed to being a political fiction won at great cost. To be honest, I sure hope you are right. If rights really are natural, the way apples fall to the ground instead of rising into the sky, then rights don't need to be defended. However, that doesn't seem to be borne out by human history. Did you ever read Kipling's poem, "The Old Issue?" The first stanza is as follows:

    All we have of freedom, all we use or know—
    This our fathers bought for us long and long ago.
    Ancient Right unnoticed as the breath we draw—
    Leave to live by no man's leave, underneath the Law.
    Lance and torch and tumult, steel and grey-goose wing
    Wrenched it, inch and ell and all, slowly from the King.
    Till our fathers 'stablished, after bloody years,
    How our King is one with us, first among his peers.
    So they bought us freedom—not at little cost
    Wherefore must we watch the King, lest our gain be lost,
    Over all things certain, this is sure indeed,
    Suffer not the old King: for we know the breed.


    You can read the entire poem here

    http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/kipling/old_issue/

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Karen,
    That first line should read, Human rights shouldn't have to be... that's what I get for not re-reading it again! Of course I believe that human rights are a natural right, that doesn't mean they don't have to be fought for! Unfortunately humans don't always treat each other very well, making it necessary for those oppressed to fight! I will edit that sentence and hopefully what I meant to say will be more clear!! Thanks for pointing it out.
    Jaime

    ReplyDelete
  3. Here are a couple of things to think about regarding civil rights.

    You say that civil rights belong to people simply because they are born, regardless of ethnicity, gender, or religion. Yet, we as a society do make necessary distinctions as to who enjoys these civil rights. Children, for example, have restricted liberties because they are generally incapable of making sound decisions for themselves. This is why the right to vote is restricted to legal adults only. The mentally handicapped also have restricted liberties. They are often times detained and medicated against their will in hopes of preventing them from becoming a danger to society themselves. The vast majority would agree that these two groups of "humans" should not enjoy the same civil rights (or equal liberties) as other members of a society. It therefore follows that civil rights should not be applied to all humans equally, but only to those who have the knowledge and experience to recognize these civil rights and make sound and rational decisions.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Jaime. I really enjoyed your post, especially how you illustrate the relationship between the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen and women. I want to discuss your statement, “The Enlightenment ideals of ‘natural rights’ led to questions about whose ‘nature’ or ‘whose God’ determines these human rights.” You bring up an excellent point. Depending on how a culture views ‘nature’ and ‘God’, natural rights inevitably will be perceived differently. In order to define natural rights, a system must be established for evaluating right and wrong. I think this is why the concept of natural rights can vary from culture to culture; different cultures that possess different worldviews each will define right and wrong in their own way. For example, the natural rights guaranteed to American citizens are different than the natural rights guaranteed to the citizens of the Islamic Republic of Iran, even though they are both republics, because the former is founded on secular (yet vaguely Christian) beliefs while the latter is founded on Islamic beliefs. (Article 2 of Iran’s Constitution states that understanding God's divine nature is fundamental in forming laws. ) That means what is “natural” or “right” is determined by two different divine sources. So in short, a great, thought-provoking post!

    Footnotes:
    1)Islamic Republic of Iran Constitution, http://www.iranonline.com/iran/iran-info/Government/constitution.html (accessed 17 Feb. 2012).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jaime and Karl,
    The reality of Natural and Human Rights is that they are chosen by whomever is educated and in charge. This also falls in line with the young and mentally handicapped. They do not have the education and/or mental capacity to make decisions without consultation. To be perfectly honest, Natural and Human Rights should include an exception to those who cannot understand circumstances around them. For this reason, the acceptance of women and African Americans took aslong as their education, as a whole, needed to catch up the nation's leaders.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hello Dean,

    Of course, "whomever is educated and in charge" makes the rules. However,that doesn't make them correct.

    Human rights is the umbrella term that includes civil, social and political rights.I believe that every single person on this earth, regardless of religion, race, gender, age or ability has the basic civil right to freedom.I also believe they have the right to basic social rights (as defined by T.H Marshall), such as access to healthcare and education. As far as political rights go, do I think my sister with Down Syndrome should go and vote? Probably not. My sister doesn't have the "mental capacity to make decisions without consultation". However, I don't think exceptions should be made, because where do we draw the line? Are we going to have people take literacy tests as they did in the South, to determine competency? Should we exclude women again? Previously it was thought women didn't have the mental capacity to make an informed vote. Should only highschool graduates be allowed to vote?

    Perhaps I am misunderstanding you, but are you saying women and African Americans were denied rights or "acceptance" as long as they were, because their education level "needed to catch up"? Will you please clarify.

    Thanks for the lively debate. :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. VIRUS REMOVAL

    Is Your Computer Sluggish or Plagued With a Virus? – If So you Need Online Tech Repairs
    As a leader in online computer repair, Online Tech Repairs Inc has the experience to deliver professional system optimization and virus removal.Headquartered in Great Neck, New York our certified technicians have been providing online computer repair and virus removal for customers around the world since 2004.
    Our three step system is easy to use; and provides you a safe, unobtrusive, and cost effective alternative to your computer service needs. By using state-of-the-art technology our computer experts can diagnose, and repair your computer system through the internet, no matter where you are.
    Our technician will guide you through the installation of Online Tech Repair Inc secure software. This software allows your dedicated computer expert to see and operate your computer just as if he was in the room with you. That means you don't have to unplug everything and bring it to our shop, or have a stranger tramping through your home.
    From our remote location the Online Tech Repairs.com expert can handle any computer issue you want addressed, like:
    • - System Optimization
    • - How it works Software Installations or Upgrades
    • - How it works Virus Removal
    • - How it works Home Network Set-ups
    Just to name a few.
    If you are unsure of what the problem may be, that is okay. We can run a complete diagnostic on your system and fix the problems we encounter. When we are done our software is removed; leaving you with a safe, secure and properly functioning system. The whole process usually takes less than an hour. You probably couldn't even get your computer to your local repair shop that fast!
    Call us now for a FREE COMPUTER DIAGONISTIC using DISCOUNT CODE (otr214423@gmail.com) on +1-914-613-3786 or chat with us on www.onlinetechrepairs.com.

    ReplyDelete