simon: Well, in the feminista fervour about equality, people seem to imagine that men had the right to vote for thousands of years and then finally gave in and allowed women to vote too.
The reality is that men didn't have the right to vote simply by virtue of being men until a short time before women did.
It wasn't todo with gender, it was todo with class and wealth. The landowners voted and the peasants did as they were told.
Well, I guess I don't fall into your definition of "people" because I am well aware that "men" didn't have the right to vote for "thousands of years". The vote came about with the establishment of democracy which didn't occur "thousands of years" ago.
The reality is that what gave men the right to vote prior to the date you have given of 1918 was if they were white and owned land and/or paid taxes. In addition to being based on race, it definitely was gender based - women could not vote at all - only white male landowners could (I realize that is a bit of a generalization - you appear to be using UK voting rights and in some democratic countries, that right was extended to white males who didn't own land but paid taxes and then later, in 1918 (UK), the common working man acquired the vote. Unless they were Chinese, black or indigenous, etc).
So 10 years - apparently the "white male patriarchy" wasn't quite as some claim - it only lasted a decade and just applied to a certain age gap.
Oh please, Simon. Do some more reading. White patriarchy only lasted a decade?? (by the way, the "male" in white male patriarchy is redundant. Patriarchy is male - no need to say it twice)
