Many people (not just feminists) believe that historically, in the US and UK, women chafed under a cruel patriarchal system that allows men to dominate women by denying us opportunities and power, and one example that is cited is that women didn't have the right to vote. But as we are going to see, it was not that cruel men were denying oppressed and powerless women the right to vote, or that men saw women as too stupid to vote, but rather that women themselves didn't want the right to vote, they didn't feel discriminated against, they still held enormous political power, and when men themselves campaigned for the right to vote, they were treated far worse than women were.

Women's lives (1920 and before)

To understand the context under which men and women were asking for the right to vote, we must look at how men and women were seen and treated under the state and law in the UK and USA. According to this source:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17387826/

Married women were known as femme coverts (covered women) and even though many in modern times saw this as women being defined as property, in actuality, it meant the following:

1) That married women needed to be taken care of and provided for by their husbands

2) That they could even have their husbands jailed for nonsupport

3) That they could not be prosecuted in their own right except for murder and treason

4) That their husbands would bear the brunt of the law if their wives committed a crime such as robbery

Married women were sometimes known as the 'favorites of the law' and England was called 'A paradise for women',

This meant that the majority of people in prison, being executed, or being in debt prisons were male. According to this source: https://www.acrosswalls.org/debt-imprisonment-men-biased/ 95% of those imprisoned for debt were men.

By the way, this was not to say that women could not work, own property, or make their own decisions, by the 1900s, women could make their own decisions on their money and property, but men needed to make sure their wives and children were cared for, while women could act on their own. According to this source, Figure 14 on Page 30, illustrates these privileges well. Married women need not support the family with their own money, women could what they liked with their own money and property, (while the husband couldn't) The husband needed to pay his wife's bills, but the same was not expected of the wife, men had to pay alimony while the women didn't, and all women were exempt from jury duty and military service.

So in short, married women (which were most adult women) didn't have to provide for themselves (their husbands did that), did not have to protect their countries (the men did that) and were not held accountable for their own actions (their husbands were).

As a woman, I believe both genders are equal, but at the time, women didn't have as much motivation to deal in political matters as men did, due to men being the majority of people in prisons, having to go to war, and provide for their families, they had more of a motivation to vote than women did. According to this source, " In practice, because of the registration procedure, a majority of men were voteless nationally, right up until the very day universal suffrage arrived. All this against the background that the bulk of government spending was on defence and the prosecution of wars — for which, of course, only men had a direct ‘interest’, being not only the only ones called up, but those paying for it (given almost exclusively men only were engaged in lifetime full-time work outside the home) — and, in the absence of even a rudimentary welfare state, national government had little other impact on people’s lives."

Women's political power

It is inaccurate to say that women held no political power in England the USA before they were able to vote. Infact they held so much power that they felt that women would actually lose power if they got the right to vote, because they would be divided across party lines.

I'll give one example of women's power, all the way from 1790s in England: Before 1790s, a woman could be burned at the stake for a number of crimes, such as treason or murder. However, in most cases, she was strangled prior and wasn't actually burned alive. The male equivalent was being hanged, drawn and quartered, where men rarely received the mercy of strangled prior. However, many people at the time felt that burning at the stake was too severe a punishment for women,

" the woman was brought out attended by a priest of the Romish persuasion, and as soon as she came to the stake she was placed upon a stool, which was instantly removed from under her, and she left suspended, when the faggots were placed around her, and being set on fire she was soon consumed to ashes.—Mr. Pitt, himself a lawyer, 'tis hoped, will not suffer this cruel remain of savage legislation to escape his notice, and continue a disgrace to the enlightened sense of this country." So, in response, the Treason Act of 1790 barred women from being burnt at the stake for treason and other similar crimes. Men could still be hanged, drawn and quartered in the late 1800s.

In the USA, according to this source, Figure 6, page 14, before the women were granted suffrage, women felt that they could do good for society without dividing themselves on party lines, and could approach matters as a collective. Of course, these women were mainly elite white women, and 'undesirable' women such as prostitutes were not part of their clubs. Many women at the time generally agreed that men "are not only willing but anxious to provide for the good of our sex. They will gladly bestow all that is just, reasonable, and kind, whenever we unite in asking" (This must be why, despite the constant preaching about a patriarchy lording over all women, most governments in the world have a dedicated women's/'gender equality' officer, who champions women's interests to the govt) These women managed to pass pure food laws, laws requiring children to attend school, and the establishment of parks and libraries, and other victories.

" Although lobbying by 1,700,000 organized clubwomen resulted in the passage of many new laws, there is a widespread misconception that women were powerless to influence lawmakers before they could vote. Anti-suffrage women never accepted this view, and as proof, they repeatedly argued that laws favoring women, such as those prohibiting night work and long hours for women factory workers, were better in non-suffrage states than in suffrage states. From 1908 to 1910, fifty-four laws to protect women workers were enacted in non-suffrage states, versus only one such law in suffrage states, according to Minnie Bronson "

Male suffragists

According to the theory of patriarchy, men should give other men power and privilege over women, so it stands to reason that when working class men wanted the right to vote, they were given it immediately, right? No. In many instances, the male suffragists were treated worse than female suffragettes.

One example I will give is the Chartist movement, they weren't treated gently:

" The state hit back. Several Chartist leaders were arrested, including O'Connor, George Julian Harney, and Thomas Cooper). During the late summer of 1842, hundreds were incarcerated; in the Pottery Riots alone, 116 men and women went to prison. A smaller number, but still amounting to many dozens – such as William Ellis, who was convicted on perjured evidence – were transported. One protester, Josiah Heapy (19 years old), was shot dead."

The chartist, William Cuffay, was also transported, (if you don't know what that is, it was one of the harshest punishments of that time due to the dangerous nature of long voyages)

Despite the Chartist petition having almost 6 million signatures (in a country of 30 million), parliament rejected it.

During the Newport Rising, several Chartists were killed or transported,

The Suffragettes

Now, compare this situation with the Suffragettes,

No suffragettes were executed or transported, instead, some were imprisoned and even then, just for a short time. One of the longest sentences was handed to Patricia Woodlock, who went to prison for three months. While chartists could be imprisoned for upto five years

Additionally, some suffragettes were unfortunately killed or wounded in the Suffragette Arson campaign, and only one was accidentally killed by a race horse (Emily Davison) even then, her death was an accident, and she was mourned, with many people expressing sympathy for her.

Other than that, none were executed by the state.

Despite the Chartist campaign having 6 million signatures (20% of the country at the time) suffrage was not granted to working class men. However, according to this source, most women at the time were either against it or indifferent toward it. Many felt that women were simply too good for politics, that they had more influence using women's clubs, and only 3% of women voted for their own suffrage. Despite all of these, women gained the right to vote in the 1920s, and have remained the majority of votes in the US and UK since then.

Even when black men gained the right to vote in the US, by virtue of them being male, they had to register for the draft, provide for their wives and children, and could face the law. White women, especially married white women, didn't have to do any of this. Still many white women were indignant that black men got the right to vote before them. Even after black men earned the right to vote, they were still heavily discriminated against, while women were mostly allowed to vote in peace.