She used her previous knowledge, her understanding and wisdom to convey to her audience that she has “ploughed, and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head [her]! And ar’n’t I a woman?” If no man helped do all that labor, gained “tremendous muscular power” then does it mean that she able to do the work man do. So why can’t she have the rights they do? With the use of logos, she could shoot down the claim “superior rights and privileges for man, on the grounds of "superior intellect"; another, because of the "manhood of Christ; if God had desired the equality of woman, He would have given some token of His will through the birth, life and death of the Saviour." Another gave us a theological view of the "sin of the first mother."” One by one she continues to justify why the white man claims were wrong or biased. Sojourner declared that intellect has nothing to do with women’s or African American rights. If someone was only partially as smart as the other, you should allow them their right to fill what they can …show more content…
She answered “Whar did your Christ come from? From God and a woman! Man had nothin' to do wid Him." Oh, what a rebuke that was to the little man.” Their unsound logic continued to be answered with what is believed to be true. With her emotional (pathos) appeal through the use of diction, tone, and volume. The point she is trying to make becomes even more clear and moving. A woman who watched her kids sold off into slavery, working hard long hours without any help, having no one to help her, and relying on God. Her story shows the untruth of the white man claims, her emotions is able to rally the men and women in the