Women historically not allowed to vote, proof of an unjust past?

[renard_ruse]

Well, that's the cliche that we are taught to believe in the cursory history classes offer in schools or on TV shows or in the common modern day perception. Its not even something questioned because its just a fact, right?

The truth is actually a lot more nuanced (if not outright opposite).

 

[renard_ruse]

Fact 1: nobody was allowed to vote through most of history, including men.

Fact 2: even in the US, most men (including white men) were not allowed to vote until well into the 19th century as there were property requirements.

Fact 3: the overwhelming cultural and societal importance on the married family unit was considered to render both married partners voting to be redundant. That can only be understood if one honestly tries to put oneself in the cultural mindset of the time without modern / post-modern biases. Most husbands who did have the right to vote consulted with their wives and, in general, the couple's interests would pretty much be the same. Even those who didn't actively consult their wife before voting were certainly influenced by her opinions. Most women didn't want to vote or see any need for it, the majority would have thought the idea dumb.

Fact 4: a household was considered an organic unit. Even today, homeowner's associations allow one vote per household. This is in fact, no different from historic property rules and one vote per household in historic voting rules.

A lot more can be said, but please try to put yourself in the mindset of the people who lived in the past before judging them. Certainly some things can be categorically condemned from the past today, such as torture, slavery, genocide, but the historically very brief period of time when there was near universal male franchise and not female certainly does not rank among them.

 

[badbabysitter]

Well, that's the cliche that we are taught to believe in the cursory history classes offer in schools or on TV shows or in the common modern day perception. Its not even something questioned because its just a fact, right?

The truth is actually a lot more nuanced (if not outright opposite).

so you'd be okay with your right to vote being stripped away because you have a penis

 

[badbabysitter]

Fact 1: nobody was allowed to vote through most of history, including men.

Fact 1: In the societies that could vote, women werent allowed to

Fact 2: even in the US, most men (including white men) were not allowed to vote until well into the 19th century as there were property requirements.

Fact 2. Women werent allowed to vote untill the 20th century, with or without property

Fact 3: the overwhelming cultural and societal importance on the married family unit was considered to render both married partners voting to be redundant. That can only be understood if one honestly tries to put oneself in the cultural mindset of the time without modern / post-modern biases. Most husbands who did have the right to vote consulted with their wives and, in general, the couple's interests would pretty much be the same. Even those who didn't actively consult their wife before voting were certainly influenced by her opinions. Most women didn't want to vote or see any need for it, the majority would have thought the idea dumb.

Fact 3. Every voice in a democracy counts.

Fact 4: a household was considered an organic unit. Even today, homeowner's associations allow one vote per household. This is in fact, no different from historic property rules and one vote per household in historic voting rules.

Fact 4. A home is typically in one partners name.. a person is not a piece of property

A lot more can be said, but please try to put yourself in the mindset of the people who lived in the past before judging them. Certainly some things can be categorically condemned from the past today, such as torture, slavery, genocide, but the historically very brief period of time when there was near universal male franchise and not female certainly does not rank among them.

Yeah, you're an idiot

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Voting rights follow taxation. Women got the vote once Americans paid the federal income tax. Before that women voted if they owned real estate. Ditto blacks. In most cases they were limited to voting in local elections where they lived.

 

[oggbashan]

If you look beyond the USA, votes for women is more complex. The vote, where it existed at all, was often linked to current or past military service (which excluded women).

In Ancient Greece, all male citizens had a vote if they could attend the Agora. But all the voting citizens were required to be soldiers if their city was at war.

In Ancient Rome, you had to be a male Roman Citizen to vote. But any man from any part of the Roman Empire could become a Roman Citizen by serving in the Legions.

During the French Revolution the new government proposed that all adult men and adult women would have a vote, and even freed slaves in the Caribbean would have a vote. They also proposed free compulsory education for boys and girls, but couldn't afford it. Napoleon Bonaparte stopped voting reform when France became an Empire.

Once standing professional armies became essential for a country's defence, the vote tended to be linked to paying taxes - usually on property. Until the 19th Century in England, the property owning voter in theory could be female, but the Victorians took rights away from women - to protect the fluffly-headed darlings! Until then women could own property in their own right. The 19th Century changed the law so that all the wife's possessions except her personal clothing - what she stood up in - became her husband's.

The suffragettes in the UK were partly campaigning for rights that women had lost in the previous hundred years.

 

[Busybody]

women vote is based on the time of the month=irrational

they shouldn't be allowed to vote