On July 22, 1905, Florence Kelley, a United States social worker and reformer, gave a speech the National American Woman Suffrage Association in Philadelphia regarding child labor laws and improving working conditions for women. Kelley’s speech included detailed examples of the child and women labor laws of each state at the time. Her use of rhetorical devices that appeal to the audience, such as strong diction and syntax, persuaded listeners to take her subject seriously and consider the reforms that needed to take place. Kelley intended to elicit a desire in her audience to change child labor laws, persuade men to agree with changing the child labor laws, and to work towards women’s suffrage. Kelley builds credibility as a speaker of this topic through the word choices she uses throughout the speech. Her use of “we,” specifically when she said “we have, in this country…” (line 1), appeals to the audience’s sense of ethos. She established herself as similar to those in her audience and displayed the patriotism she has for her country, proving herself credible. Florence Kelley used other powerful diction when she described the “deafening noise” …show more content…
One example Kelley provided stated, “In Georgia there is no restriction whatever! A girl of six or seven years, just tall enough to reach the bobbins, may work eleven hours by day or by night” (lines 32-34). This evokes emotion among the audience causing them to feel empathy for all the children, especially young girls, who have to work long hours in bad conditions. Kelley’s use of commas helps split up her speech more and adds emphasis to the importance of what she is saying. Varied sentence structure and length draws the attention of the readers as well. The author posed a question using a long sentence that began with “If the mothers and the teachers in Georgia could vote…” (lines
This allows shows that the majority of the workers were not African descendants but of those of European origins. By using different word choices as well as diction, Kelley is able to draw her audience and their attention towards her argument. At the National American Woman Suffrage Association in Philadelphia on July 22, 1905 Florence Kelley gave a well-known speech regarding child labor laws of young children.
In Florence Kelley’s 1905 speech to the Philadelphia convention of the National American Women Suffrage Association, she accentuates the obligatory need to reform the working conditions for young children.
In Florence Kelley’s speech, she discusses her anger about child labor. She gives numerous examples of how child labor is immoral and wrong, which creates a vindictive and scolding tone. Primarily through imagery, parallel structure, and exemplification, Kelley calls attention to the horror of child labor.
Rhetorical Analysis of Florence Kelley’s Speech Florence Kelley’s address to the National American Woman Suffrage Association (1905) touches upon both the social and political aspects of the need for reform regarding child labor laws. By revealing the shocking truth about how young children around the country work for long hours in inappropriate conditions, Kelley is able to emphasize the urgency of this situation. Simultaneously, she defends women’s suffrage by presenting the logical statement that there would be laws to prevent extreme child labor if women had the right to vote; more progress could be made if women and men worked together, starting with women’s right to vote. In her address to the National American Woman Suffrage Association, Florence Kelley establishes a dramatic tone and appeals to her audience’s emotions to persuade them to advocate for a reform of child labor laws by employing several rhetorical strategies. To begin, Kelley utilizes the audience’s sense of logic to generate answers to rhetorical questions such as, “If mothers and the teachers from Georgia could vote, would the Georgia Legislature have refused at every session for the last three years to stop the work in the mills of children under twelve years of age?” and “would the New Jersey Legislature have passed that shameful repeal bill enabling girls of fourteen years to work all night, if the mothers in New Jersey were enfranchised?”
In an Amazon.co.uk interview titled “Magic, Mystery and Mayhem: An Interview with J.K. Rowling,” when asked about the way she came up with the names of characters in her books, she replied, “I invented some of the names in the Harry books, but I also collect strange names. I've gotten them from medieval saints, maps, dictionaries, plants, war memorials, and people I've met!” J.K. Rowling chose these names for a reason based on the deeper meanings behind every character's name and the way they relate to their roles and personalities. In Octavia E. Butler's short story “Speech Sounds”, Rye and Obsidian were the names she chose for her characters. Rye, the name of the main protagonist which symbolizes home and earth yearns to reconnect with her family and to rebuild a family of her own while Obsidian, the supporting character, is named after a type of lava stone, which is believed to contain magical properties that “absorbs and destroys negative energy such as anger, criticism, and fear” (Zagata). The names of the characters have two purposes: to describe the character's role and personality, and to give them an identity.
During America's early history, women were denied some of the rights to well-being by men. For example, married women couldn't own property and had no legal claim to any money that they might earn, and women hadn't the right to vote. They were expected to focus on housework and motherhood, and didn't have to join politics. On the contrary, they didn't have to be interested in them. Then, in order to ratify this amendment they were prompted to a long and hard fight; victory took decades of agitation and protest. Beginning in the 19th century, some generations of women's suffrage supporters lobbied to achieve what a lot of Americans needed: a radical change of the Constitution. The movement for women's rights began to organize after 1848 at the national level. In July of that year, reformers Elizabeth Cady Stanton(1815-1902) and Lucretia Mott (1793-1880), along with Susan B. Anthony (1820-1906) and other activists organized the first convention for women's rights at Seneca Falls, New York. More than 300 people, mostly women but also some men, attended it. Then, they raised public awar...
In Florence Kelley's speech to the people attending the NAWSA convention, she uses emotional appeal to motivate her audience to convince their male counterparts to legalize voting for women, and also to persuade the males to help put an end to child labor.
The nineteenth century encountered some of most revolutionary movements in the history of our nation, and of the world – the movements to abolish slavery and the movement for women’s rights. Many women participated alongside men in the movement to abolish slavery, and “their experience inspired feminist social reformers to seek equality with men” (Bentley, Ziegler, and Streets-Salter 2015, pg. 654). Their involvement in the abolition movement revealed that women suffered many of the same legal disadvantages as slaves, most noticeably their inability to access the right to vote. Up until this time, women had little success in mobilizing their efforts to gain the right to vote. However, the start of the women’s rights movement in the mid-1800s, involving leaders such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott, paved the path for the expansion of women’s rights into the modern century.
American journalist and politician Claire Boothe Luce, and her speech to the journalist at the Women's National Press Club, criticize the American press for surrendering fulfilling work for cheap dramatize stories. Luce, in her speech, discussed the many problems the journalist face in the writing community. This purpose is to introduce problems in the writing community. She uses happy tone to appeal to her uninterested colleagues, as well as, diction, ethos, pathos, and logos. Claire Luce gives a powerful speech while bringing the American press down.
Women throughout the suffrage act were faced with many challenges that eventually led into the leading roles of women in the world today. Suffrage leaders adopted new arguments to gain new support. Rather than insisting on the justice of women’s suffrage, or emphasizing equal rights, they spoke of the special moral and material instincts women could bring to the table. Because of these women taking leaps and boundaries, they are now a large part of America’s government, and how our country operates.
Led by Clara Lemlich, 20,000 immigrants, mostly young women, demanded a twenty percent pay raise, a fifty-two hour workweek, and a closed shop (59). Their cause gained a significant amount of attention and caught the eye of wealthy progressive reformers, such as Alva Belmont and Anne Morgan, who perceived the strike as an opportunity to also advocate their own objective: women’s suffrage. Wealthy elites like Carnegie and Sumner may have believed that efforts to change the natural order are futile, but Morgan claimed that after learning about the details of the strike, she and other women wouldn’t be able to live their lives “without doing something to help them” (72). These affluent women demonstrated their support from both sides of the spectrum, from modestly distributing ribbons and buttons, to Alva Belmont’s contribution of her several cars to a parade for the striking workers (682) and the pledge of her mansion as surety for the bail of four strikers (76). Without the aid of these women, it was doubtful the strikers “could have lasted much longer without progressive money” (70). However, frustration arose amongst picketers as these progressive reformers turned a strike based on class struggle into a “broader feminist revolt” (68). Morgan blamed the strikers’ treatment on the inability for women to vote, not their inability to unionize (67). Striker’s retorted, asking
Elizabeth Cady Stanton, along with many other women, packed into a convention on a hot July day to all fight for a common cause; their rights. At the first Women’s Rights convention, Stanton gave a heroic speech that motivated the fight for the cause to be even stronger. Through Stanton’s appliances of rhetorical devices such as emotional, logical, and ethical appeals, she was able to her win her point, change the opinions of many, and persuade people to follow her.
Hence, through various rhetorical strategies, Kennedy achieves his purpose of gaining the spectators’ favor through stressing major current events that concerned the American people. These significant concepts include American patriotism and American diplomacy, stressed when he begins four consequent paragraphs with the same recurring three words, “Let both sides.” Kennedy’s brilliant use of pathos, parallelism, antithesis, and varied syntax successfully convey his ambitions and hopes for America, as it makes Kennedy’s speech a very memorable one in history.
Every woman in the world has heard at least one “you cannot” in her lifetime. Believe it or not there used to be a time when society believed that statement and women were confined to cooking, cleaning, or housekeeping. Today, there are many amazing women pursuing their dreams, such as Hillary Clinton, a very famous politician, and Sally Ride, the first American woman in space. The women back in the 1840’s are the reason women today have this freedom, the women who changed feminism forever. The women’s suffrage movement was a long-standing battle for equality between men and women that should have been instituted from the start of our country due to women’s increasing political intelligence and work ethic. This became instituted thanks to Alice Paul and Susan B. Anthony whose work was primarily in the 1880’s. Alice Paul and Susan B. Anthony are still some of the most influential women in history because of their bravery and mental strength in the women’s suffrage movement.
The speech that was analyzed was “Your Body Language Shape Who You Are” by social psychologist, Amy Cuddy. Amy explained in her speech that other people’s and your body language can display how a person can perceive themselves in a power dominance situation. Also, Cuddy described how an individual can change how a room of people views them by simply arranging their posture. Amy Cuddy gave an effective speech by her delivery of the topic, her credibility on the subject, and how she kept the audience engage.