Redende Frauen

Black or white, these talking women were seen as unsexing themselves by addressing “mixed audiences” of both men and women—a practice considered inappropriate for women in the 19th century. Their bold actions drew support from some and strong criticism from others, creating a national conversation about women’s proper role in public life. Sometimes, they were even likened to whores. Mobs of people would turn up to protest—not necessarily their ideas about slavery— but the fact that they were speaking to men in public. Women even received death threats to scare them back into their sphere. 

The Grimké sisters defended their right to speak publicly by arguing that women could not effectively help enslaved people if they were required to remain silent. They pointed out that women were often criticized for even small forms of activism—circulating petitions, participating in women-only meetings, or singing in church. If women accepted these restrictions, they argued, they would never be able to contribute meaningfully to the antislavery cause. Sarah Grimké took this further, explaining in her published letters that women had long been kept legally and socially subordinate to men. She wrote that women had no political existence, no right to control their own property, and were denied equal educational opportunities. For her, the struggle for women’s rights and the fight against slavery were connected, because both involved overturning unjust systems of power.

Margaret Fuller challenged the idea that women belonged only in the home and should focus solely on domestic responsibilities. She argued that this limited view of women’s “sphere” failed to recognize women’s intellectual abilities or their potential to contribute to society. Fuller pointed out that many women could not rely on men for lifelong protection and would need education, independence, and the ability to stand on their own at times. Because women’s minds were capable of growth and deep thought, she believed they should have the freedom to learn, express themselves, and participate in public discussions.

One of the ironies of women’s history is that patriarchal norms are often upheld by other women. Catharine Beecher, a well-known educator and writer, believed strongly that men and women had different roles assigned by God. In her view, men were naturally suited for public leadership, while women were meant to be peacekeepers within the home. She believed women’s influence came from their ability to guide loved ones through kindness and moral example, not through speeches or political involvement. Beecher worried that public speaking would expose women to ridicule, conflict, and even danger. She thought that once women stepped into public debates, they risked losing the special respect and protection that society granted them. According to Beecher, even signing petitions to Congress pulled women out of their “appropriate sphere” and threatened the social order.

​

A more complicated voice in the debate was Theodore Weld, a leading abolitionist and Angelina Grimké’s future husband. Weld personally supported women’s equality and believed that women were just as capable as men in every area of life. However, he worried that the Grimké sisters’ decision to speak publicly about women’s rights, in addition to abolition, might weaken the antislavery movement. He felt that their unique background as Southern women speaking against slavery gave them a powerful advantage that could be lost if critics focused instead on their bold statements about gender equality. Weld believed that abolition should remain the priority and that the struggle for women’s rights could follow later.

In the end, the debate over women’s public speaking was about much more than speeches—it was about Lockean views of the public and private spheres. It raised questions about whether women should be allowed to participate fully in American democracy, whether their talents were equal to men’s, and whether they had a responsibility to speak out against injustice. 

By the late 1850’s the divisions between the north and south were too intense to be ignored. Talk of secession was eminent. John Brown, a radical abolitionist from New York who had done his part to protest slavery in Bleeding Kansas, led a raid on Harper’s Ferry, Virginia. Harriet Tubman was supposed to be with him, but she was on another mission. For many southerners, Brown’s raid showed the end was near. Southerners were already on edge, and when Lincoln was elected as president in 1860, it was the last straw. ​

​

When Julia Ward Howe met President Lincoln in 1861, she penned new words to the familiar tune, “John Brown’s Body,” and “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” was created. The song was a popular and invigorating anthem among Union soldiers not only toward victory, but the moral imperative to end slavery. She said:

​“Let the Hero, born of woman, crush the serpent with His heel,

Since God is marching on. As He died to make men holy,

​let us die to make men free; While God is marching on.

He is coming like the glory of the morning on the wave,

He is wisdom to the mighty, He is honor to the brave;

So the world shall be His footstool, and the soul of wrong His slave,

Our God is marching on.”