Early U.S. women legitimated their public presence through two topoi or commonplaces for rhetorical invention: rights and virtue. They appealed to woman's unique moral qualities, such as her ability to nurture, while advocating that men and women were fundamentally equal in the eyes of the state. These topoi created a paradox that women still face today. We revisit Emma Goldman's free love rhetoric to recover a third possibility. Arguing that marriage be rejected, Goldman challenged audiences to ignite their inner desires, living life in balance with humanity. We argue that Goldman's third topos, passion, is a productive lens through which to read discourses that may not fit the virtuous or civic ideal, such as those articulated by third wave feminists.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 46 citations exist upstream.