How were people persuaded to agree with the women rights movement?

The fight for women’s suffrage in the United States began with the women’s rights movement in the mid-nineteenth century. This reform effort encompassed a broad spectrum of goals before its leaders decided to focus first on securing the vote for women. Women’s suffrage leaders, however, disagreed over strategy and tactics: whether to seek the vote at the federal or state level, whether to offer petitions or pursue litigation, and whether to persuade lawmakers individually or to take to the streets. Both the women’s rights and suffrage movements provided political experience for many of the early women pioneers in Congress, but their internal divisions foreshadowed the persistent disagreements among women in Congress that emerged after the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment.

"Votes for Women" ButtonView Larger

Collection of the U.S. House of Representatives

Manufactured by the Whitehead & Hoag Company in Newark, New Jersey, this dime-sized button announces support for women’s voting rights. The phrase “Votes for Women” was one of the suffrage movement's main rallying cries.

The first attempt to organize a national movement for women’s rights occurred in Seneca Falls, New York, in July 1848. Led by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, a young mother from upstate New York, and the Quaker abolitionist Lucretia Mott, about 300 people—most of whom were women—attended the Seneca Falls Convention to outline a direction for the women’s rights movement.2 Stanton’s call to arms, her “Declaration of Sentiments,” echoed the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal.” In a list of resolutions, Stanton cataloged economic and educational inequities, restrictive laws on marriage and property rights, and social and cultural norms that prevented women from enjoying “all the rights and privileges which belong to them as citizens of the United States.”3 Stanton also demanded for women the “sacred right to the elective franchise”—despite objections from Mott and others who considered this provision too radical. The convention eventually approved the voting rights resolution after abolitionist Frederick Douglass spoke in support of it.4

the correct answer is “opportunity cost”. opportunity cost is what a company misses out because it decided in one option over another one. in this case, the company decided to invest in building a factory so it gave up another possible benefit or profit in order to achieve success with the factory.  

trade-off is not the correct answer since it is a situation in which you accept losing something in return for benefits in other areas.

and finally, consequence is a general term used to accept what it comes when you make a decision. it can be a positive or negative consequence depending if the decision you took was the correct one.  

it broke up the ottoman empire (just a small fact) and the turkish leaders lost many soldiers.