TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Why has everyone forgotten about male suffrage? While the story of female suffrage is taught at school from a young age, few people today know the long and gruesome history of how men won the right to vote in the UK.

[deleted]

April 2, 2015
125 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11509811/Why-has-everyone-forgotten-about-male-suffrage.html
Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Why has everyone forgotten about male suffrage? While the story of female suffrage is taught at school from a young age, few people today know the long and gruesome history of how men won the right to vote in the UK.
Author

[deleted]

Upvotes 125
Comments 20
Date April 2, 2015 12:57 PM UTC
(11 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/316qb3/why_has_everyone_forgotten_about_male_suffrage/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/why-has-everyone-forgotten-about-male-suffrage.984198
https://theredarchive.com/post/984198

Comments

[–]DavidByron2 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

In the UK both sexes got the vote in 1918 in the same act of parliament.


I happen to know this because I tried to research it a long time ago for scores of different countries across the world. And in every single case to find out when women first got the vote was fall off a log easy. Finding out when most men first could vote was a huge ordeal. There are hundreds of pages about women's vote and absolutely nothing about men getting the vote. Even when they do talk about voting before women could vote it's always cached in terms other issues, and not getting the vote for men. A lot of the time you have to guess at the answer because there's nothing certain you can find in the sources.

Feminist revisionism history acts as if men have always had a vote since pre-history. It's so fucked up I have had feminists on several occasions complain about how oppressed women are to not have a vote in countries which are not even today democracies. This sort of historic revisionism is a sign of a hate movement. Re-writing the past to make the target group out to be a threat, to be powerful when it is not.

[–]Mitthrawnuruodo1337 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Since you already did this research, I would request that if you have time you make a review of it and give us some useful links. It would be nice to have some simple and succinct resources at our disposal if we have more open-minded people who are mistaken about their history (as are most, as the author of this article points out).

[–]DavidByron2 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

My old web site.

https://web.archive.org/web/20041027140249/http://members.tripod.com/feministhate/id49.htm

[–]Mitthrawnuruodo1337 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Thanks! I'll take a look when I have time. Is this on /r/MensRightsLinks, btw?

[–]DavidByron2 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Um... probably not. it's a dead site from the 90s.

[–]ezetemp 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Indeed. In Sweden, women got the unqualified right to vote first, in 1921, while men were still required to have completed military service. In 1922, the last sex related inequalities with regards to voting were removed.

The period when a majority of men (80%+) actually did have a right to vote while women could not was limited to between 1909 and 1921 and was qualified with having done military service.

Before that, only a minority had any right to vote at all, and that was largely tied to land and wealth.

[–]_pluto_ 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Do you know of a good suffrage timeline for the US? Thanks.

[–]DavidByron2 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Not really.

Off the top of my head you have 1788 men and women both allowed to stand for federal elections. At that time restrictions on voting by money or land (and therefore effectively race and sex) are common (set by the states). Through the early half of the 19th century you get more states allowing all adult men to vote, but what with the system of states and territories (no federal voting to anyone in a territory), the racism the slavery and the voting age of 21 it's debatable whether 50% of adult men could vote before 15th amendment after the Civil war / 1860s. But probably it happened around the 1830s just. At this time Victoria Woodhull contends that the broad wording of the 14th amendment effectively already gives everyone the vote, (this theory is at first rejected by the US Supreme Court but then accepted by them by around the 1970s) and Susan B Anthony is arrested for trying to vote. By the 1890s the introduction of the Australian ballot (secret ballot) revolutionizes the idea of voting and puts an end to arguments about people with no independent means of income not getting a vote for fear of open intimidation by landlords or husbands. Around 1910 you still have public opinion split on women's vote with a scant majority of women still opposed to it. 1914 changes public opinion as women enter factories for the support of the war. 1918 organized opposition to women's vote collapses with the passage of Prohibition (alcohol interests funded anti-suffrage lobbying for fear that women with a vote would support temperance). 19th amendment passes the same year.

After that I'm more hazy. Did the voting age get reduced to 18 first around the 1960s and then Native Americans got a vote in the 1970s? not sure. Denial of vote for ex-cons is still legal in the USA (there is no American "right to vote").

So the US gap is a wide one (80-90 or 50-60 years?) for voting although zero for standing for elections. Not the worst. That would be Switzerland and France I think.

[–]_pluto_ 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Thanks.

[–]DavidByron2 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Also I linked to an old site of mine above.

https://web.archive.org/web/20041027140249/http://members.tripod.com/feministhate/id49.htm

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

On the scale of things - say last 4000 years - men and women attained suffrage at roughly the same time.

But don't let that upset a bad feminist argument.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

SUMMARY:

Before 1918 only men over 21 who owned property could vote. circa 8 million.

Most of the men, by a long stretch, killed in the first world war could not vote.

After 1918 every man over 21 regardless of whether he owned property could vote. circa an extra 5 million.

From the article:

At the 1910 general election, 7,709,981 men were registered to vote. By the time of the 1918 general election there were 12,913,166 registered male electors in the United Kingdom. The 1918 Act is, rightly, most famous for having brought more than eight million women into the electorate; but, for the first time, it also enfranchised more than five million men over the age of 21 without regard to property or class.

[–]DavidByron2 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

rightly, most famous for having brought more than eight million women into the electorate

That's bullshit. That's exactly the bullshit this article is supposed to be countering. privileging women's lives over mens, privileging women's history over mens.

[–]ALTSuzzxingcoh 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You should know by now that no major newspaper, online or real life, would ever have the guts to publish an article covering men's rights without appending "but wait, 'tis about the womenz, also!" somewhere in it.

[–]DavidByron2 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh I know, and I try to point it out every time. People sometimes get really pissed off when I do it too. "Can't you just let it slide? They were on our side!"

[–]disposable-name 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because - duh! - every single man was part of the elite!

/s

[–]koji8123 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because patriarchy

/s

[–]EnderESXC -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

We learn it in America, but only because it's part of the American Revolution unit.

[–]tallwheel 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nope. Non-property owners in the U.S. didn't get the vote until later.

[–]reaganveg 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Guess they were short on time in your class and had to combine Jacksonian Democracy and the American Revolution into one lesson.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter