My grandmother was a suffragette here in the USA. She took each granddaughter to register as a voter when we reached the age of 18. She told each of us, "I went to jail so you have this privilege. Never forget, and never refuse to vote." I had an emergency surgery decades ago, and left the hospital two days after the surgery to vote, then went back to my hospital bed. My husband asked me why, and all I could say is "my grandmother went to jail so I could vote. How can I not?" I've never missed a chance to vote and I'm 69.
Honestly, I can't believe this doesn't have a million views. You, and Millicent, argued this with kindness, frankness, and transparency. Thank you for this video!
This is _fantastic_ content! I just really wish you'd do a re-upload with the sound volume fixed! 🙏🙏🙏 The low volume is a bit of a problem, but the big problem is the part in the middle that is suddenly normal volume. It breaks people's ears 😢 (08:46 - 09:12) Again though, thanks for the brilliant content!
I like that #1 is like “we listen to you already” and #3 and #4 are like “If women had the vote then we’d have to listen to you and that would be insufferable.”
I'd also point out on the last point that women's right to vote had been taken away. until 1832 some women property owners ( where they were head of a household, so widows and spinsters) could vote in general elections. The Great Reform Act had limited the franchise to male persons
1:262:113:01 I truly love how your answer to “Why are you bringing this up?” doesn’t just highlight this particular issue, but reminds us of a big part of why studying history is so important! ❤ 📚 📖 (Also 2:50! Being able to explain WHY we deserve the rights that we deserve gives us the ammunition we need to defend them when they become threatened. Without that, we risk losing them all over again.)
On the plus side, I am glad the last thing I heard was shamelessly bombastic, tuneful, and well performed. It could have been a school orchestra murdering a pop culture dirge that stayed with me forever instead.
I thought it was just me! I could not hear the video at all at first, then I turned the volume up ALL the way (and put on the captions) and I could just barely hear it. I practically got blown out of my chair when Verdi's Anvil Chorus came on!
I've always loved the stories of Edith Garrud. She taught jujitsu to the suffragettes. Women would line their dresses with cardboard to block police batons. They would also surround stages with garland... that had been intertwined with barbed wire to slow down men who would rush the stage. Other great stuff.
the intellectual inferiority one is interesting because in many places the lack of education of women does make them intellectually inferior, which is often only corrected after they get the vote.
small technical complaint: I had to crank up the audio on my tele to hear you but when Verdi's anvil chorus came on, I had to lunge for the remote and mute it because It's 1 am here.
Thanks for another great video! You can never be too prepared, especially since society seems to be going backwards. I'm surprised #6 head-of-household argument wasn't biblical. With 30% of the US population being fundamentalist Christian, specific scripture word salad isn't an unusual tactic for a lot of things.
Like you say - such tactics are part of the cultural makeup of some people in the US today but this was culturally a different time AND place. While some people used religious arguments against suffrage, just as many or more people viewed the right to vote as a moral issue and not just political or social. The Church League for Woman's Suffrage had over 6,000 members including clergy and bishops and established a theological case for reform. That did not mean others did not use what they could co-opt to retain their power structures - whether it be 'biblical' or 'scientific' arguments on the inferiority of women. But in both cases true scholarship put paid to them.
I like the bit withe the posters about men taking care of their children. In 1975 Iceland they had a national "Women's Day Off" where 90% of women joined demonstrations taking the day off both formal work and the unpaid kind. Many fathers had to stay home and take care of the kids.
This is a superb video, and great point about us these days not having the arguments to hand to rebut the anti-suffrage arguments. More stuff on voting please!
I had to laugh at the image that popped up at 11:32 as an example of "seats on trains" chivalry. The title of the painting is "The Irritating Gentleman" by Berthold Woltze and shows a man taking advantage of a young lady's lack of chaperone to pester her. We can't be sure what he is saying, but by her body language and tear-stained cheeks we can imagine it is nothing remotely chivalrous. Her all-black outfit signifies that she is in mourning, possibly explaining why she is traveling all alone. The TH-cam channel Art Deco has a video about this piece, titled "This Painting Will Make You Cringe" that I highly recommend.
I've met women who don't want to be treated as equal to men and think they shouldn't be involved in "such things". I... do not meet them twice usually. Boring. I like my women with free will and knowing they're too good for me. Now that's a catch.
My favorite anti suffrage argument comes from the lovely Jewish Anarcha-Feminist Emma Goldman: voting only allows you to choose your own oppressors. It doesn’t actually make a society more democratic as long as Capitalism and the State exist. Therefore, instead of fighting for the franchise, women should fight for Anarchy. As a Transfemme Anarchist who would’ve been refused the franchise while Goldman wrote on the subject, I agree with her. I purposefully do not vote since the idea that bourgeois democracy is democratic is laughable. Direct democracy is possible, preferable, and I have the vote in every org I’m a part of and that is the only franchise I care about. That all being said, women LOSING the right to vote now that we have it would be horrible. Not because of the loss of the vote as such, but as another attack on women and non men which gives us even less legitimacy in the public discourse.
so interesting to hear how arguments like this have developed over the years- some of them sound totally random while others I recognise as still having variations about today. Also interesting to hear her arguments for some of them- you're totally right about the intelligence one, I'd be so annoyed that someone was calling women stupid I wouldn't think to point out that their argument was ridiculous even if it was true
I'd like to offer an alternative counter to argument seven, following the pattern of some of her other arguments. "Of were going to restrict the vote based on potential competence as an MP, i can think of a good few men..."
Hi, we really enjoyed this video! BUT the volume levels are all over the shop, very quiet when you're talking and really loud when you cut in with characters!
The anti suffrage arguments back then were already as inconsistent as today. The fact that they could seriously argue that on the one hand women would all just vote the same as their husbands and brothers because they have no opinions of their own, and on the other hand that if women could vote they'd start to get political opinions of their own and argue all the time with their husbands and brothers would be hilarious if it wasn't so mean!
I really love your videos and I learn a great deal from each one, and think about things you taught me long after watching, but this is not a comment of praise or a comment about this particular video, but about the majority of your videos. Admittedly this could be partly my frailty, as I am now in my mid-fifties, and it seems to me that it is getting generally a bit harder to hear things, but I can't watch very many of your videos, even with headphones of good quality, without straining to hear and the additional assistance of subtitles. I'd rather watch you, the speaker, than read at the bottom of the video and lose many of your expressive facial gestures, well chosen backgrounds that assist in the understanding of your content, and the interesting fashion you wear often to illustrate your topic. I don't have this much difficulty with any other youtube creators. Is there anything you can do to punch up the volume on your side of the screen? Respectfully submitted from a loyal fan.
John Stuart Mill argued for biased elections giving more votes to middle class people "to maintain balance between classes" sort of undermines the whole conservative bias argument...
jesus christ the audiobalancing! had to turn my volume way up to hear you speak, but when the music started at 8:46 it nearly deafened me. is there any way for you to fix this?
Really interesting that this popped up not long after watching a video by a US creator showing a video of a US pastor making all the anti suggest arguments listed here... In 2024...
5:20 I find it interesting that you found this one to be the weird one, because it's the one I hear most often today. In fact, it seems to me that the whole point of the modern anti-suffrage movement is a longing for this dictatorship at home. And to these people - none of your counter arguments. Many of these people have no respect for democracy, are often willing to at least consider switching to a dictatorship in government politics, view their freedoms as a tool for exercising their supremacy over others, not as something universal, and think that a dictatorship is exactly how to run a household. And there's a scarily large and growing number of these people
The paying tax argument is a bit flawed, as that is about the government taking a fair share of the money an individual extracts from the economy, we don't in the UK (unlike the US but even there alot of people earn too little too pay tax) tie taxation to citizenship (if you go abroad you don't pay taxes to the UK). The argument is also inherently classist, as WW1 demonstrated.
Dictatorship is not a good way to run a household, is really a lesson every Irish Ma could do with learning!! (luckily mine doesn't use youtube or I'd be in for a bollocking and I haven't lived at home in years!)
Lovely video (as are all of your videos) but whoooeee is the volume-jumping rough in this one, have to turn it up so much to hear the white shirt portions that the other sections blared quite obnoxiously. This is not a recurring problem in other vidoes though, so i guess this one is just quirky :/ PS your long form stuff is criminally under-viewed!
I can't believe there are still people who think women shouldn't vote. On the other hand I know men today arguing about the women should allowed to write books and a woman can't write novels or they don't understand literature etc.
@@hissingsidll750Well that's totally subjective, most female comedians are trying to make blokes laugh particularly. What makes my mum and grandma laugh can be different to what makes me laugh. There's nothing wrong with having media for women, men will always call it unfunny and try to claim that humour is objective. Half of youtube comments is just arguing over what is and isn't funny. Also most male comedians I find to be cringey or unfunny but I don't say "oh men are so unfunny" or white people aren't funny". When you find a woman isn't pandering to your with her material it's automatically to do with her being a woman. People these days are still getting used to different opinions and different types of comedy all being put in the open. Of course people that love dark racist right wing punching dkw comedy will find left leaning queer comedy that talks about women and queer folks like humans boring and unfunny. I hate seafood but I don't claim it's objectively bad, even though it looks, smells and tastes like absolute shit, like a dirty crotch.
Ive never ever heard that women could or were or were seen as not as clever as men. 😅 But I did. Grow up around my 2 sisters and mum. 😅 Oh and i suppose borat said his scientists proved it. Tbh as a man I'd be happy to give up my right to vote and let my girlfriend vote for me. I just can't be bothered to do an hour walk at 9pm after work to vote for some toff.
The first point is interesting, as arguable the counter suffrage argument may have been proved right in the UK in the 20th century. Women disproportionately voted tory in the 20th century (if women hadn't had the vote, Labour would have won most elections, the majority of women only voted Labour in 2017). As such women rights, including reproductive rights, and issues that disproportionately benefit women, like family benefits, minimum wage, part time worker rights, childcare were all held back considerably. Even Thatcher was anti feminist. So it is somewhat interesting with hindsight.
If a constituency wants a woman MP they should be able to pick one, doesn't really chime with centrally enforced all women shortlists. Arguable someone like Luciana Berger a middle class southern imposed on a working class liverpool constituency, and she didn't even know simple things about the city like what river flowed through it, or what the football teams were.
I could imagine many working class people, particularly those conscripted to go and die in the trenches might feel it was wrong for middle class women to get the vote, as that would likely mean more foreign wars for them to be badly supplied, live in bad conditions and ultimately die in.
Working class women exist. Regardless, other than in your imagination, do you have evidence that middle class women of the era were more belligerent than the average man?
@@ruthspanos2532 "Working class women exist" indeed they do and did, if only suffragettes would fight for their rights too. They are called books try reading them and you will appear less foolish.
I truely come in innocent intentions and mean absolute respect to you ,...but I think I'm smitten,..you are the cutest thing I think I have ever seen,..wld you consider marriage, how do you feel about flying,....lol okay okay I'm teasing,....a lil lol I do realize the reality at hand ,I'm just very sad now ,my beautiful destiny I will get to dream into creation ⚘⚘
And one of the things that bothers me about this argument of the franchise was the idea that you have rights but these rights come with concurrent obligations and duties. They are not free. We can see that in our current Society with the falling birth rates that these obligations and duties to society to your country to your family are being shirked by women. And these falling birth rates are not sustainable within a social welfare state. At some point the state will be overwhelmed by its obligation to pay for all of these welfare programs without the concurrent ability to do so because of lack of taxpayers. And this failure will be directly laid at the feet of women because of their unwillingness to get married and have children to fulfill their obligations and their duties to themselves and Society.
Or birth rates are falling bc the cost of raising children has increased. As for womens obligation to have children perhaps you have forgotten that it takes 2 people to conceive a child. I find your argument that my right to vote hinges on my ability to conceive ridiculous. I work and pay taxes just like any other person. Why is it a womans responsonsibilty to breed to finance your "welfare state" get to it and start fertilizing some eggs yourself.
@@estellerobicheau852 you're right to vote is not dependent on your willingness to pay taxes just as the right to vote was not given to males because of their ability to pay taxes. You have to realize that males were given the right to vote when there was no income tax they weren't given the right to vote because they were expected to pay taxes they were given the right to vote because they were expected to die for their country. You're right to a vote is dependent on your willingness to not allow our society and culture to go extinct. And one way or the other are birth rates will improve whether you like it or not either because our society collapses and a new set of rules will arise or you will decide to to fulfill your obligations. The current situation that we for find ourselves in is not sustainable. You cannot have a social welfare society with birth rates this low. It will collapse.
@@eod9910 You seem to have a... novel view on history. By 1430, only landowners who received at least 40 shillings a year in rent could vote, that corresponded to less than 10% of adult men. Meanwhile in the mid 15th century the war of the roses was being fought, which involved a small number of richer men of arms, knights, and archers fighting, but was largely fought by common soldiery, poor common folk who couldn't vote. 'In 1781 the right to vote in counties was made dependent upon a charge, laid within six months of the election, "toward some aid granted or to be granted to His Majesty by a land-tax or an assessment, in the name of the person claiming to vote," (20 George III, c. 17)'. Plenty of people who were expected to die for their country weren't given the vote, and for a long time being allowed to vote was explicitly tied to taxes. Also, the expansion of voting rights to all adult men, and later all adult women, was quite directly the extinction of an older society and culture that said that only the richest and most powerful men in the country had any value.
@@lawrencebates8172 I'm not speaking of anything that occurred to prior to the ratification of the Constitution in 1788. I'm only talking about the events after the ratification of the Constitution and prior to full emancipation of males in the mid early 1800s. And as you full well know when the Constitution was first introduced most people did not have the right to vote only landowners. Because the thinking was that those people were the ones that had skin in the game because they payed taxes on that land. North Carolina was the last date to give male suffrage in 1856.
@@eod9910 You realise that this video was about British history, right? I mean, the arguments made in the video are still largely true regardless of time or place. But anything in the US after the ratification of the constitution really has no direct bearing on this subject.
Truth is, I would prefer equality. Personally, I think that if that happened again today, we should die equally on that boat (not prioritizing rich people or women, but yes, prioritizing children), drawing straws or something to see who gets to go. But, of course, no one should have died at all on the Titanic. I hope you have a nice day, Happy Women's Day!
Except they don't survivors are often the most healthy, so children are the worst off and there is no indication that women get preference. Titanic is an exception, and since it's the most famous shipwreck, it might be why it's believed to happen more generally. Source: Elinder and Erixson 2012.
Bro this was not a choice made by women. I’d still prefer voting rights all my life rather than better odds of survival in the EXTREMELY unlikely event of my being on a sinking ship
@@Poliss95 Women had a much higher chance of survival - regardless of what class they were in - then men did. Of the 466 women on board, 339 survived. Of the 843 men on board, only 161 survived - a measly 19% compared to the 73% of women who made it safely back to shore.
My grandmother was a suffragette here in the USA. She took each granddaughter to register as a voter when we reached the age of 18. She told each of us, "I went to jail so you have this privilege. Never forget, and never refuse to vote." I had an emergency surgery decades ago, and left the hospital two days after the surgery to vote, then went back to my hospital bed. My husband asked me why, and all I could say is "my grandmother went to jail so I could vote. How can I not?" I've never missed a chance to vote and I'm 69.
Here in Canada the vote box is brought to patients. I've voted twice while in hospital.
@@westzed23that is very smart they should bring that to the United States
Honestly, I can't believe this doesn't have a million views. You, and Millicent, argued this with kindness, frankness, and transparency. Thank you for this video!
It's inaudible.
@@Mathemagical55 If you turn it up, and remember to turn it down again around 8:45, you can hear it well enough. It's worth it to hear what she says!
This is _fantastic_ content! I just really wish you'd do a re-upload with the sound volume fixed! 🙏🙏🙏
The low volume is a bit of a problem, but the big problem is the part in the middle that is suddenly normal volume. It breaks people's ears 😢 (08:46 - 09:12)
Again though, thanks for the brilliant content!
"You can't ban someone from voting just because you dont like their political views."
Puerto Ricans, Samoans, and residents of DC wish this were true.
If I were Puerto Rican or Samoan, I'd vote for independence tomorrow.
Sorry, D.C., you're still more screwed...
:authoritarianism has entered the chat:
I like that #1 is like “we listen to you already” and #3 and #4 are like “If women had the vote then we’d have to listen to you and that would be insufferable.”
I used to know an elderly lady who came to England in 1938 to escape Hitler. She always voted. She absolutely always voted, and so do I.
I'd also point out on the last point that women's right to vote had been taken away. until 1832 some women property owners ( where they were head of a household, so widows and spinsters) could vote in general elections. The Great Reform Act had limited the franchise to male persons
1) This is quite an excellent video.
2) WOW, the song Volga Boatman was quite loud! 😶
It seems quite fitting to stumble upon this on international women's day. Lovely video :)
1:26 2:11 3:01 I truly love how your answer to “Why are you bringing this up?” doesn’t just highlight this particular issue, but reminds us of a big part of why studying history is so important! ❤ 📚 📖 (Also 2:50! Being able to explain WHY we deserve the rights that we deserve gives us the ammunition we need to defend them when they become threatened. Without that, we risk losing them all over again.)
This needs to be re-recorded. The content is great but the audio is way too soft and then way too loud.
rip the ears of head phone users...
If it makes you feel any better, I also listened to it through headphones and am now dead.
wasn't ready for this, send help
It's at 8:45 you all need to be careful, FYI!
On the plus side, I am glad the last thing I heard was shamelessly bombastic, tuneful, and well performed. It could have been a school orchestra murdering a pop culture dirge that stayed with me forever instead.
I think I need new eardrums
These same arguments were being made in the US! I love these answers!
Love the content. The audio could use some help.
I thought it was just me! I could not hear the video at all at first, then I turned the volume up ALL the way (and put on the captions) and I could just barely hear it. I practically got blown out of my chair when Verdi's Anvil Chorus came on!
Maybe she should get a man in *runs away fast* (I'm really sorry, I couldn't help it) 😂😂😂
@@pamr.429 verdi blew my ear drums too not just you.
Thank you for bringing this up. Arguing things which we seem as perfectly normal is quite difficult.
I've always loved the stories of Edith Garrud. She taught jujitsu to the suffragettes. Women would line their dresses with cardboard to block police batons. They would also surround stages with garland... that had been intertwined with barbed wire to slow down men who would rush the stage. Other great stuff.
"Women are easily influenced."
"Women will cause arguments."
Things that make you go "huh?"
Thanks!
I admire your wonderful videos. This one seriously needs to have its audio levels evened out.
the intellectual inferiority one is interesting because in many places the lack of education of women does make them intellectually inferior, which is often only corrected after they get the vote.
small technical complaint: I had to crank up the audio on my tele to hear you but when Verdi's anvil chorus came on, I had to lunge for the remote and mute it because It's 1 am here.
This is a brilliant video. I will go and learn some more about her now!
I throughly enjoyed this video especially as I have just been to Aldeburgh and saw her sister’s house! What a remarkable family!
@JDraper I wish more people would see this. Can you please re-release it with better audio?
I wonder if any anti-suffragists ever noticed that the "women are too easily led" and "women are too obstinate" arguments are somewhat contradictory.
This was fascinating, and also useful.
Thanks for another great video! You can never be too prepared, especially since society seems to be going backwards. I'm surprised #6 head-of-household argument wasn't biblical. With 30% of the US population being fundamentalist Christian, specific scripture word salad isn't an unusual tactic for a lot of things.
Like you say - such tactics are part of the cultural makeup of some people in the US today but this was culturally a different time AND place. While some people used religious arguments against suffrage, just as many or more people viewed the right to vote as a moral issue and not just political or social. The Church League for Woman's Suffrage had over 6,000 members including clergy and bishops and established a theological case for reform.
That did not mean others did not use what they could co-opt to retain their power structures - whether it be 'biblical' or 'scientific' arguments on the inferiority of women. But in both cases true scholarship put paid to them.
Milicent had it going on! ❤ I love that "intelligence" argument she gives!
Your costumes are exquisite.
I can hear you. Also, love the content. Looking forward to traveling to London just to schedule a series of tours.
I like the bit withe the posters about men taking care of their children. In 1975 Iceland they had a national "Women's Day Off" where 90% of women joined demonstrations taking the day off both formal work and the unpaid kind. Many fathers had to stay home and take care of the kids.
Could you please re-release this with the audio fixed
This is a superb video, and great point about us these days not having the arguments to hand to rebut the anti-suffrage arguments. More stuff on voting please!
The anvil chorus coming in nearly deafened me.
My English teacher in Catholic grade school was a (British) Suffragette. She said they didn't fight for equality, but for POWER.
As they ought to. Equality without power is at the mercy of power and will be threatened at the earliest convenience
The music got so loud that I snatched the iPods out of my ears.
I had to laugh at the image that popped up at 11:32 as an example of "seats on trains" chivalry. The title of the painting is "The Irritating Gentleman" by Berthold Woltze and shows a man taking advantage of a young lady's lack of chaperone to pester her. We can't be sure what he is saying, but by her body language and tear-stained cheeks we can imagine it is nothing remotely chivalrous. Her all-black outfit signifies that she is in mourning, possibly explaining why she is traveling all alone.
The TH-cam channel Art Deco has a video about this piece, titled "This Painting Will Make You Cringe" that I highly recommend.
I've met women who don't want to be treated as equal to men and think they shouldn't be involved in "such things". I... do not meet them twice usually. Boring. I like my women with free will and knowing they're too good for me. Now that's a catch.
good video, but WOW does that musical cue come in WAY too loud!
My favorite anti suffrage argument comes from the lovely Jewish Anarcha-Feminist Emma Goldman: voting only allows you to choose your own oppressors. It doesn’t actually make a society more democratic as long as Capitalism and the State exist. Therefore, instead of fighting for the franchise, women should fight for Anarchy.
As a Transfemme Anarchist who would’ve been refused the franchise while Goldman wrote on the subject, I agree with her. I purposefully do not vote since the idea that bourgeois democracy is democratic is laughable. Direct democracy is possible, preferable, and I have the vote in every org I’m a part of and that is the only franchise I care about.
That all being said, women LOSING the right to vote now that we have it would be horrible. Not because of the loss of the vote as such, but as another attack on women and non men which gives us even less legitimacy in the public discourse.
As a thick northern man I would quite happily give up my vote for a seat on a train. I can barely imagine such luxury these days.
so interesting to hear how arguments like this have developed over the years- some of them sound totally random while others I recognise as still having variations about today.
Also interesting to hear her arguments for some of them- you're totally right about the intelligence one, I'd be so annoyed that someone was calling women stupid I wouldn't think to point out that their argument was ridiculous even if it was true
I have my sound turned up to 100% I cannot hear a word you say. Please fix your sound.
Same, I've noticed this on other of your videos
I'm having the same problem.
Social commentary on women not having a voice?
When the video hits the political cartoon montage, RIP yoir speakers
Same.
I'd like to offer an alternative counter to argument seven, following the pattern of some of her other arguments. "Of were going to restrict the vote based on potential competence as an MP, i can think of a good few men..."
Excellent 👍👏🧚♀️
Holy shit this whole video is so quiet, I had to turn my volume up to 100. Then at 8:45 you fucken blast my ears. oww...
Hi, we really enjoyed this video! BUT the volume levels are all over the shop, very quiet when you're talking and really loud when you cut in with characters!
The anti suffrage arguments back then were already as inconsistent as today. The fact that they could seriously argue that on the one hand women would all just vote the same as their husbands and brothers because they have no opinions of their own, and on the other hand that if women could vote they'd start to get political opinions of their own and argue all the time with their husbands and brothers would be hilarious if it wasn't so mean!
That was really good
Anti-suffrage people should not be allowed to vote.
I really love your videos and I learn a great deal from each one, and think about things you taught me long after watching, but this is not a comment of praise or a comment about this particular video, but about the majority of your videos. Admittedly this could be partly my frailty, as I am now in my mid-fifties, and it seems to me that it is getting generally a bit harder to hear things, but I can't watch very many of your videos, even with headphones of good quality, without straining to hear and the additional assistance of subtitles. I'd rather watch you, the speaker, than read at the bottom of the video and lose many of your expressive facial gestures, well chosen backgrounds that assist in the understanding of your content, and the interesting fashion you wear often to illustrate your topic. I don't have this much difficulty with any other youtube creators. Is there anything you can do to punch up the volume on your side of the screen? Respectfully submitted from a loyal fan.
John Stuart Mill argued for biased elections giving more votes to middle class people "to maintain balance between classes" sort of undermines the whole conservative bias argument...
Love your channel……but please, in general, raise the volume on all your vids. We can always turn it down. We want to hear you.
jesus christ the audiobalancing! had to turn my volume way up to hear you speak, but when the music started at 8:46 it nearly deafened me. is there any way for you to fix this?
Those antisufferage posters have the exact same energy as modern wojack meme. Good to know ignorance never changes.
Really interesting that this popped up not long after watching a video by a US creator showing a video of a US pastor making all the anti suggest arguments listed here... In 2024...
5:20 I find it interesting that you found this one to be the weird one, because it's the one I hear most often today. In fact, it seems to me that the whole point of the modern anti-suffrage movement is a longing for this dictatorship at home. And to these people - none of your counter arguments. Many of these people have no respect for democracy, are often willing to at least consider switching to a dictatorship in government politics, view their freedoms as a tool for exercising their supremacy over others, not as something universal, and think that a dictatorship is exactly how to run a household. And there's a scarily large and growing number of these people
Note that the sound was almost entirely missing, except for the Anvil Chorus.
This Millicent lady sounds pretty smart
What were the arguments made for letting men vote once that was extended outside the nobility?
The paying tax argument is a bit flawed, as that is about the government taking a fair share of the money an individual extracts from the economy, we don't in the UK (unlike the US but even there alot of people earn too little too pay tax) tie taxation to citizenship (if you go abroad you don't pay taxes to the UK). The argument is also inherently classist, as WW1 demonstrated.
Why aren't there more sculptures of women in Parliament Square?
The idea that women are naturally conservative is fascinating.
Dictatorship is not a good way to run a household, is really a lesson every Irish Ma could do with learning!! (luckily mine doesn't use youtube or I'd be in for a bollocking and I haven't lived at home in years!)
Darling!! One has ones volume on rage, yet can barely hear you. Please fix asap as one wishes to remain with the in crowd. Cheers
Watch yout volume levels across the video. Especially when you wdit in a song. It went from 3 to 11! Careful.
Please fix the sound on this video. Shocking audio.Literally.
a little low volume
I would love to be a stay at home husband to take care of the children:3
Lovely video (as are all of your videos) but whoooeee is the volume-jumping rough in this one, have to turn it up so much to hear the white shirt portions that the other sections blared quite obnoxiously. This is not a recurring problem in other vidoes though, so i guess this one is just quirky :/
PS your long form stuff is criminally under-viewed!
Fantastic content but a moment of silence for my ears was wearing headphones for the political cartoons
Please fix the sound quality, unwatchable with how low it is 😓
I can't believe there are still people who think women shouldn't vote. On the other hand I know men today arguing about the women should allowed to write books and a woman can't write novels or they don't understand literature etc.
There's not many good comediennes that's for sure
That's a good point😆not in stand up at least, but there women ho good in comedy.@@hissingsidll750
@@hissingsidll750Well that's totally subjective, most female comedians are trying to make blokes laugh particularly. What makes my mum and grandma laugh can be different to what makes me laugh. There's nothing wrong with having media for women, men will always call it unfunny and try to claim that humour is objective. Half of youtube comments is just arguing over what is and isn't funny.
Also most male comedians I find to be cringey or unfunny but I don't say "oh men are so unfunny" or white people aren't funny". When you find a woman isn't pandering to your with her material it's automatically to do with her being a woman. People these days are still getting used to different opinions and different types of comedy all being put in the open. Of course people that love dark racist right wing punching dkw comedy will find left leaning queer comedy that talks about women and queer folks like humans boring and unfunny. I hate seafood but I don't claim it's objectively bad, even though it looks, smells and tastes like absolute shit, like a dirty crotch.
SOUND PLEASE
Not the girlboss/malewife cartoons
why is this video so quiet?
cannot hear this ,is that me or ..?
💜💚
The click bait title totally got me to watch the video 😂
No sound.
Volume all the way up, and still I can barely hear what you're saying.
Wait, wait, wait. Chivalry is pretty dead these days. I guess men really were just being polite because women couldn't vote...
What are you saying? I can't read lips, I'm sorry....😢
Ive never ever heard that women could or were or were seen as not as clever as men. 😅 But I did. Grow up around my 2 sisters and mum. 😅 Oh and i suppose borat said his scientists proved it. Tbh as a man I'd be happy to give up my right to vote and let my girlfriend vote for me. I just can't be bothered to do an hour walk at 9pm after work to vote for some toff.
The first point is interesting, as arguable the counter suffrage argument may have been proved right in the UK in the 20th century. Women disproportionately voted tory in the 20th century (if women hadn't had the vote, Labour would have won most elections, the majority of women only voted Labour in 2017). As such women rights, including reproductive rights, and issues that disproportionately benefit women, like family benefits, minimum wage, part time worker rights, childcare were all held back considerably. Even Thatcher was anti feminist.
So it is somewhat interesting with hindsight.
Terrible sound 😢😢
Too quiet
From old history books, Women could vote If they were super rich then you got to vote so what Millicent did was got the average women and man the vote
If a constituency wants a woman MP they should be able to pick one, doesn't really chime with centrally enforced all women shortlists. Arguable someone like Luciana Berger a middle class southern imposed on a working class liverpool constituency, and she didn't even know simple things about the city like what river flowed through it, or what the football teams were.
WUT?!
I could imagine many working class people, particularly those conscripted to go and die in the trenches might feel it was wrong for middle class women to get the vote, as that would likely mean more foreign wars for them to be badly supplied, live in bad conditions and ultimately die in.
The men sent off to fight weren't allowed to vote either.
Working class women exist.
Regardless, other than in your imagination, do you have evidence that middle class women of the era were more belligerent than the average man?
@@ruthspanos2532 "Working class women exist" indeed they do and did, if only suffragettes would fight for their rights too.
They are called books try reading them and you will appear less foolish.
I read books. I misread your comment to mean that women in general shouldn’t have gotten to vote in order to prevent middle class women from voting.
@@ruthspanos2532 Then I apologise for any harshness in my previous comments.
I truely come in innocent intentions and mean absolute respect to you ,...but I think I'm smitten,..you are the cutest thing I think I have ever seen,..wld you consider marriage, how do you feel about flying,....lol okay okay I'm teasing,....a lil lol I do realize the reality at hand ,I'm just very sad now ,my beautiful destiny I will get to dream into creation ⚘⚘
And one of the things that bothers me about this argument of the franchise was the idea that you have rights but these rights come with concurrent obligations and duties. They are not free. We can see that in our current Society with the falling birth rates that these obligations and duties to society to your country to your family are being shirked by women. And these falling birth rates are not sustainable within a social welfare state. At some point the state will be overwhelmed by its obligation to pay for all of these welfare programs without the concurrent ability to do so because of lack of taxpayers. And this failure will be directly laid at the feet of women because of their unwillingness to get married and have children to fulfill their obligations and their duties to themselves and Society.
Or birth rates are falling bc the cost of raising children has increased.
As for womens obligation to have children perhaps you have forgotten that it takes 2 people to conceive a child. I find your argument that my right to vote hinges on my ability to conceive ridiculous. I work and pay taxes just like any other person.
Why is it a womans responsonsibilty to breed to finance your "welfare state" get to it and start fertilizing some eggs yourself.
@@estellerobicheau852 you're right to vote is not dependent on your willingness to pay taxes just as the right to vote was not given to males because of their ability to pay taxes. You have to realize that males were given the right to vote when there was no income tax they weren't given the right to vote because they were expected to pay taxes they were given the right to vote because they were expected to die for their country. You're right to a vote is dependent on your willingness to not allow our society and culture to go extinct. And one way or the other are birth rates will improve whether you like it or not either because our society collapses and a new set of rules will arise or you will decide to to fulfill your obligations. The current situation that we for find ourselves in is not sustainable. You cannot have a social welfare society with birth rates this low. It will collapse.
@@eod9910 You seem to have a... novel view on history. By 1430, only landowners who received at least 40 shillings a year in rent could vote, that corresponded to less than 10% of adult men. Meanwhile in the mid 15th century the war of the roses was being fought, which involved a small number of richer men of arms, knights, and archers fighting, but was largely fought by common soldiery, poor common folk who couldn't vote. 'In 1781 the right to vote in counties was made dependent upon a charge, laid within six months of the election, "toward some aid granted or to be granted to His Majesty by a land-tax or an assessment, in the name of the person claiming to vote," (20 George III, c. 17)'. Plenty of people who were expected to die for their country weren't given the vote, and for a long time being allowed to vote was explicitly tied to taxes. Also, the expansion of voting rights to all adult men, and later all adult women, was quite directly the extinction of an older society and culture that said that only the richest and most powerful men in the country had any value.
@@lawrencebates8172 I'm not speaking of anything that occurred to prior to the ratification of the Constitution in 1788. I'm only talking about the events after the ratification of the Constitution and prior to full emancipation of males in the mid early 1800s. And as you full well know when the Constitution was first introduced most people did not have the right to vote only landowners. Because the thinking was that those people were the ones that had skin in the game because they payed taxes on that land. North Carolina was the last date to give male suffrage in 1856.
@@eod9910 You realise that this video was about British history, right? I mean, the arguments made in the video are still largely true regardless of time or place. But anything in the US after the ratification of the constitution really has no direct bearing on this subject.
You get first seats in the lifeboats while the men get to stay on the boat and die aka the Titanic.
Truth is, I would prefer equality. Personally, I think that if that happened again today, we should die equally on that boat (not prioritizing rich people or women, but yes, prioritizing children), drawing straws or something to see who gets to go. But, of course, no one should have died at all on the Titanic. I hope you have a nice day, Happy Women's Day!
Except they don't survivors are often the most healthy, so children are the worst off and there is no indication that women get preference. Titanic is an exception, and since it's the most famous shipwreck, it might be why it's believed to happen more generally.
Source: Elinder and Erixson 2012.
I see you know sod all about the Titanic either.
Bro this was not a choice made by women. I’d still prefer voting rights all my life rather than better odds of survival in the EXTREMELY unlikely event of my being on a sinking ship
@@Poliss95 Women had a much higher chance of survival - regardless of what class they were in - then men did. Of the 466 women on board, 339 survived. Of the 843 men on board, only 161 survived - a measly 19% compared to the 73% of women who made it safely back to shore.
Am I right in thinking that Millicent's sister was Elizabeth Garrett Anderson the first woman to qualify as a doctor in Britain?