‘—

Michael Marbella: Assignment 1 – A Critique on the Presumed Morality of Movements that Agitate for Social Good

In Chapter 3 of Women, Race & Class, Angela Davis makes special note of Frederick Douglass’s participation in galvanizing support for women’s suffrage within the fledgling women’s rights movement. While Douglass stood at the forefront of the Black Liberation Movement as a skilled orator and figure of renown and distinction, Douglass’s initial reluctance to support the cause of women’s suffrage—as demonstrated by the quote in which he cites “ ‘custom,’ ‘natural division of duties,’ [and the] ‘indelicacy of women taking part in politics’ ” as his “shallow plea” against the cause (Davis 54)—forces us to reconsider the sweeping assumption that the separate movements that pushed for a greater sense of equality within our country—such as abolitionism, black liberation, women’s liberation—always perceived solidarity and, in effect, each other as instrumental to the other’s liberation when oftentimes, the opposite was true.

While Douglass later defended that women’s suffrage was essential and necessary, his opinion was held only by a small yet vocal minority when considered within the larger consciousness of the white, upper-class women’s liberation movement. Such sentiments were echoed even at the Seneca Falls Convention, which we as Americans tend to consider the birthplace of women’s liberation in general. And perhaps most tellingly, although members of the Black Liberation Movement were among the first to voice their support for women’s suffrage, no evidence of a reciprocal solidarity was found within the women’s liberation movement, essentially shutting black women and even working class white women out of the conversation, at least based on the narrative Davis puts forward.

Bearing this in mind, I feel that, especially considering the social context of the 1970’s in which Davis created this text, Davis is presenting us with this narrative on the interaction of race, gender, and class to force a greater critical analysis on the ideologies of liberation movements and to remind us that short-sightedness, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness are not just follies of those who stand on the “wrong side of history” but that such fallacies are inherent even within those who agitate for greater social good.