Women in early mid-1800s started to fight for equal rights more than ever. Since American males have been granted more rights since the American independence, women started to question the reasons behind why they are not getting the same rights as men. This started a generations of women fighting for their equal rights. From the arguments presented by first wave feminists for women’s right and the evidence against inclusion by their detractors, the first wave feminists for women’s right had a better convincing argument because they did not over exaggerate their arguments and evidence to the arguments that they made. Whereas the men who wrote about why women should not have rights like men exaggerated their arguments too far. They made …show more content…
This seems to be a little exaggerated because giving rights to women is like when the constitution was made to give and protect the rights of men, the constitution can give and protect the rights of men and women. It would be weird at the time for people to see that women have rights as men, but American society would not change radically. One of the pro-rights that was written was called “Seneca Falls Convention, Declaration of Sentiments (1848)” argued that men had been throughout history damaging women rights that they should have and having absolute control over them. The document explains the argument of men having total control of men by presenting many fact statements of stuff that’s was happening to women. One of the statements presented is “He has never permitted to exercise her inalienable right to the elective franchise.” This shows that men banned women from taking part of one of the most important of human rights which is to expresses their voice by voting for what they think deserve their vote. The other fact statements are other things that men thought that women should not have access to. The document states clearly that men are not giving women any rights at all, they are having a total control over them because they think they are