~ archived since 2018 ~

Only 58% of the adult male population was eligible to vote before 1918 in the UK.

ZimbaZumba

March 24, 2014

42 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/electionsvoting/womenvote/overview/thevote/

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Only 58% of the adult male population was eligible to vote before 1918 in the UK.
Author	ZimbaZumba
Upvotes	42
Comments	45
Date	March 24, 2014 4:06 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/218m0t/only_58_of_the_adult_male_population_was_eligible/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/only-58-of-the-adult-male-population-was-eligible.1002410 https://theredarchive.com/post/1002410

Comments

[–]typhonblue 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]logsin 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dungone 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]chavelah 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]itchybrain 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]FloranHunter 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SomeGuy58439 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]coffeyspoons 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZimbaZumba[S] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago* (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]coffeyspoons 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]autowikibot 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Voting Rights Act of 1965:

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. §§ 1973–1973bb-1) :372 is a landmark piece of federal legislation in the United States that prohibits discrimination in voting. It was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson during the height of the American Civil Rights Movement, and Congress later amended the Act five times to expand its protections. Designed to enforce the voting rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Act allowed for a mass enfranchisement of racial minorities throughout the country, especially in the South. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the Act is widely considered to be the most effective piece of civil rights legislation ever enacted in the United States.

Image ⁱ

^Interesting: ^Democratic ^Party ^(United ^States) ^| ^Civil ^Rights ^Act ^of ¹⁹⁶⁴ ^| ^List ^of ^{jurisdictions} ^subject ^to ^the ^special ^provisions ^of ^the ^Voting ^Rights ^Act ^of ¹⁹⁶⁵ ^| ^Lyndon ^B. ^Johnson

^Parent ^commenter ^can ^toggle ^NSFW ^or ^delete^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| ^FAQs ^| ^Mods ^| ^Magic ^Words

[–]ZimbaZumba[S] 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZimbaZumba[S] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]FloranHunter 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]coffeyspoons 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

I haven't, no. Based on the fact I'm a pacifist, I wouldn't enlist in the army - I think the horrors faced by men such as my grandfather are despicable and show the worst side of humanity, and I admire the men who were brave and courageous enough to either choose to fight or were forced to. My grandmother still sleeps with granddad's sword [or whatever the mouldy holder contains aside maggots] under her bed and her face darkens when the war is mentioned, based purely on the stories he brought back with him after the war. I am absolutely not dismissing/belittling the great trauma and horror faced by the men fighting. What I AM doing is attempting to discuss the point from a less restrictive viewpoint - and as I said in response to another reply along your lines, I did not bring up warfare. All I did was respond to the Redditor who did.

As far as male privilege goes, I disagree with you. Men experienced war and, as said above, I fully accept [if not understand due to not having been there, obviously] what you're saying in that respect. That does not, however, equal the playing field past or present in the slightest.

[ps. thanks]

edit. wanted to clarify "despicable and show the worst side of humanity" - talking about the perceived disposability of soldiers as viewed from a higher up level, I hate violence so those 'moving the pieces on the chessboard' so to speak are those I was referring to

[–]ZimbaZumba[S] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Now you're the one erasing women from history. Aren't the wives and daughters and mistresses of the "oppressors" also guilty for oppression? Why do they get a pass? They reaped the benefits, they were active in creating this culture where their men went out and raped and pillaged and oppressed because that's what they made men do to succeed with them.

It's like war, the naive Feminist approach is just to say, "wars happen because men are violent", but wars happen for complex social, cultural and economic reasons, don't you think wives complaining about their husbands not bringing home enough bacon or putting enough food on the table is, on a basic level, a motivating factor here? Don't you think women are guilty in participating in the racism and xenophobia and nationalistic sentiments that lead to war?

It's not about who has the power, it's about who the power is being used in service of, why would women need to rule when the men rule in their favor? Women are still "underrepresented", we still live in a "Patriarchal" culture, yet women seem to be doing quite well, oftentimes better than men, why is that? How could they get these advantages for themselves without holding power? It's because a culture exists where men provide for women. Women wield power indirectly, but they're still bear an equal part of the responsibility, and it's time there was some real accountability on that. Instead Feminists continue to erase and take power away from women throughout history to strengthen their own case when really women have always been half of the problem.

[–]coffeyspoons -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Tamen_ 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]typhonblue 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]coffeyspoons -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZimbaZumba[S] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]coffeyspoons -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZimbaZumba[S] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]coffeyspoons -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZimbaZumba[S] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]coffeyspoons -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ZimbaZumba[S] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]typhonblue 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]coffeyspoons -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]autowikibot 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Women's Armed Services Integration Act:

Women's Armed Services Integration Act, a United States law enacted on June 12, 1948, enabled women to serve as permanent, regular members of the armed forces in the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and the recently formed Air Force. Prior to this act, women, with the exception of nurses, served in the military only in times of war. During World War II, over 150,000 women had served in the WAVES (the Navy) and the Women's Auxiliary Army Corps and were still serving when the act was enacted. The act limited service of women by excluding them from aircraft and vessels of the Air Force and Navy that might engage in combat.

^Interesting: ^Claire ^McCaskill ^| ^United ^States ^Coast ^Guard ^| ^List ^of ^positions ^filled ^by ^presidential ^appointment ^with ^Senate ^confirmation ^| ^History ^of ^women ⁱⁿ ^the ^United ^States

^Parent ^commenter ^can ^toggle ^NSFW ^or ^delete^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| ^FAQs ^| ^Mods ^| ^Magic ^Words

[–]typhonblue 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In the UK, they had an extensive debate regarding conscription of women during world war 2. Women being incapable was not an issue; preventing women from having to face the same depredations as men was.

That was one of the few times conscription of women was sort of implemented and the sacrifices expected of "conscripted" women were trivial compared to conscripted men.

Judging from that debate, the issue in the west wasn't that "women weren't permitted" but that people would not tolerate women suffering war. They would, however, tolerate men suffering war.

The point remains. Men were expected to become property of the state in times of war, regardless if they could vote or not; women never were.

Citing women lacking a vote as "oppression" is simplifying a far more complex legal and social landscape.

[–]coffeyspoons -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]anon_and_on 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]logsin 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 12 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]chavelah 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link