That's because women themselves voted against it. Which is actually the history of the female franchise everywhere. The suffragettes were reduced to bombing campaigns because fellow women did not agree that women should be allowed to vote. In the UK it was only WW1 that changed things. Maybe in the UK female franchise would also have been much delayed if not for the huge social upheavals caused by the world wars.

▲

n4r9 20 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> women themselves voted against it

Do you have a source for this? According to Wikipedia,

> An earlier referendum on women's suffrage was held on 1 February 1959 and was rejected by the majority (67%) of Switzerland's men.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerl...

▲

tzs 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> That's because women themselves voted against it

That's rather confusing. If women didn't have the right to vote, how would they be able to vote on the question of whether or not to grant women the right to vote?

	▲	1718627440 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Public opinion and newspaper influence. I think the idea that any policy is about a male/female divide is wrong. I also think, that women in the past having no influence on politics only because they weren't putting their name on documents, is flawed.