Trigger warning: maths. Stat-heavy post.
As far as England and the wider UK are concerned, suffrage was universal. Women’s suffrage is a category error.
Women were not explicitly banned from voting in Great Britain until the 1832 Reform Act and the 1835 Municipal Corporations Act.
READ A HISTORY BOOK. Property (class) and location (class) were factors. …Class.
They’re trying to make it about sex when it was really based on societal contribution aka merit.
The suffragettes protested that they had no decision-making ability over how their taxes were spent, yet they still had to pay taxes like a man. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_Tax_Resistance_League
Plenty of men couldn’t vote either. Including many of those who died in WW1.
1918: The rotten repressive male Establishment voted 7-1 in favour of votes for some women (restricted at that point by age and property qualifications) and all men over the age of 21. In the 1928 Act, the franchise was extended to women on equal terms with men.
It really was a simple case of balancing out what was newly handed to men (no qualification).
Sometimes qualification was quite literal. “From 1918–1928, women could vote at 30 with property qualifications or as graduates of UK universities, while men could vote at 21 with no qualification.”
Hence all the petty squabbles over land law and inheritance for centuries, including male assertions of the rights of youngest sons. Suck on that, MRAs.
Why am I going into this? Isn’t it obvious?
You’d think so, wouldn’t you?
Sample comments I have seen;
It’s not as much fun to place the blame where it belongs..on those men who allowed women’s suffrage.
Actually we were on strike until we got it. That’s why we got it. Same as the men.
Suffrage doomed us. We’re just coasting now, on fire, crankshaft broken, heading over the cliff.
A lot of the new MGTOW are trying to conceal their misogyny very poorly by blaming all women the way neo-Nazis with nothing going for them blame all Jews. They’re saying unironically that women’s suffrage was the reason everything about the West is ruined, all the PC dogma and Marxism (invented by a man) was the fault of women, ignorant of knowledge of ancient societies (which allowed female political power and leaders, golden eras led by Queens) and basically most things beyond America. As if men aren’t at the top of this degenerate pyramid, from Soros to the founder of FEMEN. Men are in political power, men are the sex responsible for PC politics.
For lolz, let’s look at the voting statistics anyway, eh? Since women are so bad at maths according to these dimwits (unless you have the intellectual curiosity to look up the data and see boys perform worse).
Historically, the widely held view is that males outperform females in tests of mathematical ability (Halpern, 1986; Hill, Corbett, & St Rose, 2010; Hyde, Fennema, & Lamon, 1990). Early reviews of empirical research in this field concluded this was a “robust” finding (Halpern, 1986, p. 57) or, at least, it was one of several “fairly well-established” gender differences (Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974, p. 352). Although subsequent formal analyses of these data indicated that gender differences in mathematical ability were often small in size (Hyde et al., 1990), recent research continues to show some differences but they vary according to certain factors, including level of mathematical ability, type of mathematical ability and examination format.
Those are called extraneous variables as non-sex factors so no, they don’t count in support of the original, disproven finding.
There is little evidence of a male advantage in high school mathematics tests in either the US or the UK. In the US, “trivial differences” between boys’ and girls’ mathematics results have been found in all school years between Grade 2 (7–8 year olds) and Grade 11 (16–17 year olds) (Hyde, Lindberg, Linn, Ellis, & Williams, 2008).
But sure, women are bad at maths… BRING ON THE STATS.
Evidence exists of women voting when it was on the law books during that brief window of British history, which isn’t the basis for anything since it was more of a trial period that failed the test.
But, at a stroke, it provided me with tangible proof that Victorian women were not only eligible to vote, but actually exercised that right, some 75 years before they received the parliamentary franchise in 1918.
Although I knew that in theory women retained the right to vote for some local officials in the nineteenth century, I had never seen any evidence of them doing so in practice. This lack of evidence had led me, and many other historians, to assume that voting was entirely a male prerogative before the twentieth century.
Yet, it has prompted a need to re-write the history books by providing the first substantial proof that women were able to vote long before they received the parliamentary or municipal franchise.
There are as many conservative women as men in the general population, I reject your specious argument that women must vote red.
It’s Left vs. Right, that’s the only division and anyone claiming otherwise is an identity politics shill.
Where population demographics are concerned, race, age group (life phase) and class (including property ownership) are more predictive than sex. Shall we restrict suffrage based on those things? No? Oh, you wouldn’t like somebody questioning your right to vote based on something beyond your control? How about more stats?
In America alone, more women turn up to the polls than men. Whose fault is that?
63.7% Percentage of female citizens 18 and older who reported voting in the 2012 presidential election. By comparison, 59.7 percent of their male counterparts reported voting.
There is a famous Gender Gap in voting, true.
Recently in Europe it closed but prior to this (pre-1990s), women were more likely to vote conservative.
Suck on that.
Back to America:
Leighley and Nagler (1992) tested whether demographic factors, like race and gender, are more important than socioeconomic factors like education in predicting voter turnout, and found that while it is important to include measures of demographic factors, education is a much stronger predictor of voter turnout. Likewise, Wolfinger and Rosenstone (1980) document the lower voter turnout among Blacks and Hispanics, but attribute this lower rate of voter turnout to lower educational levels and higher proportions of young and poor among minorities. Other results suggest that women are also more likely to register and vote (Jennings 1985, 1989, 1993).
Education = IQ.
I have covered previously why IQ testing to qualify voting ability would hurt men and help women (women have higher average intelligence that the test is normalized by, men have more retards). Sure, advocate for it, see if I’m wrong.
In the UK, voter turnout has dropped among both sexes, but especially women, either failing to register or turn up at the booths.
Turnout has declined across both genders. But the drop is most significant in women. According to statistics compiled for the British Election Study – which were analysed by the Commons Library – the number of ‘missing’ female voters has risen by 79 per cent since 1992.
Aka you can’t blame the Labour Governments on women (1997-early 2010).
Between 1992 and 2010, the number of women voters in general elections fell by 18 per cent.
However, a Telegraph poll in October last year found that just 12 per cent of female voters think the Labour leader would make a good prime minister, compared with 31 per cent who backed Cameron.
2.6:1 in favour of the conservative. Hmm.
I’ve covered previously that political party identification is genetic, especially for liberalism. AKA clean your own house and muck out your own stables of Red Men before crying to us.
Look at how stable voting preferences are in light of demographics (in support of the genetic hypothesis). If sex for example were so important, you’d see a sharp divide, yet all differences are accountable by rounding error.
OH LOOK SUCH A MASSIVE DIFFERENCE.