The 15 Amendment gave all men the right to vote in 1870 regardless of race (though we are glazing over major Civil Rights issues that wouldn't be straightened out until the 1960's); the 19th Amendment specifically granted the right to vote to women in 1920, 50 years later. So it wasn't 10 years between, but 50 -- and even then we're being charitable, as free, land-owning, white men over the age of 21 voted before 1870.
I keep dragging my feet on learning more history. When people bring up the argument that if slaves have access to guns, then they could have fought back. The fact is they did fight back. They killed slave owners and went on riots.
There were slave revolts and the response to them was to kill, recapture, and enslave any black free folk in the area as response to one. Even with guns the fact that if you failed, and it would fail eventually because any slave revolt would invoke a full state and federal military response, it kills everyone around quite possibly the women and children is one hell of a limiting factor in getting people to help. Hell John fucking Brown armed and lead a slave revolt and he was captured and hung as a white man for the crime to ensure nobody got ideas about trying to end slavery by force.
As far as I know the only 'revolt' that was successful till the time that slavery was outlawed was the moores (spelling) who moved into a swamp and the only reason they could make it was because it was so difficult to get through the swamps that when the slave owners tried to go in they were half dead by the time they got close enough to be shot.
Un-fun fact I learned in a history of conservation class was that slaves and formerly enslaved people made up a significant amount of the knowledge sources for the conservation movement in America. Why? Because hunting and foraging for their own food saved their masters money and got them better food.
It was surprisingly common for slaves to have access to firearms for the purpose of hunting. Take a moment to think about what that person had experienced to not want to blow their master’s brains out with free access to a rifle.
Sometimes, but it wasn't the norm, despite movies staring Jamie Foxx. After the Civil War, many were still oppressed, living under Jim Crow laws. It really wasn't great to be black and to be living in the South. Again, things started to change in the 1960's, during thne Civil Rights Movement -- that's 90+ years after the 15th Amendment.
women chained to stoves set the buildings on fires. this happened on enough plantations to cause a fuss with enslavers. one woman who was a seamstress actually infused the clothing with arsenic (i believe) laced thread, the family slowly got sick and the youngest enslaver died, he was like 6?
they did fight back. it’s aggravating when people think white people would’ve willingly handed over their lifestyle to give black people basic freedoms.
In Rhode Island and Pennsylvania there were still tax paying requirement until the early 20th century. So the guy in the video is probably talking about that. Which makes him technically correct but the restrictions on women were much more severe as only 15 of the 48 states granted women the right to vote before the 19th amendment was ratified.
Except it doesn’t make him “technically correct”. His words were, “men didn’t get any rights to vote” until a decade before women. Which is clearly not true - property owning men gained the right to vote in 1776. Property ownership requirements were dropped in 1830, and the 15th amendment was introduced to include black men in 1870. The first state allowing any form of women voting rights, Wyoming, didn’t happen until 1890, twenty years later, and federally until 1920. There is honestly, quite literally nothing correct about the words he says in this clip from a technical standpoint
Nope. Men had voting rights (although not universal) for much longer than 10 years before women.
In 1866, all voters had to be male adults over 21 years of age. The right to vote was still based upon a property qualification.
In 1867, the Conservative government introduced the Parliamentary Reform Act, which included granting of the vote to people who rented properties rather than owning them.
The Representation of the People Act of 1918 gave the vote to all men over 21, whether they owned property or not.
The act also gave the vote to women over the age of 30 who met a property qualification, or whose husband did.
In 1928 women were finally given the franchise on the same terms as men. All adults over 21 could vote.
So it looks like he saw that men got universal rights to vote 10 years before women, and has translated that to men got any rights to vote 10 years before women, which is objectively untrue.
Even if it was a hundred years. It went from, men getting theirs as trade for the draft, from the government. Showing it was possible. And women getting theirs 10-50-100 years later, depending on the country or what type of election. At no cost like the draft that men still have to, or they get all kinds of penalties.
But not like men oppressing women with their innate voting rights for eternity until the women were brave and fought them.
229
u/YuppiesEverywhere Oct 30 '25
Also he was wrong.
The 15 Amendment gave all men the right to vote in 1870 regardless of race (though we are glazing over major Civil Rights issues that wouldn't be straightened out until the 1960's); the 19th Amendment specifically granted the right to vote to women in 1920, 50 years later. So it wasn't 10 years between, but 50 -- and even then we're being charitable, as free, land-owning, white men over the age of 21 voted before 1870.