They may not have been able to vote (the same as most men) but they were important, and, in Britain anyway, they received the vote at the same time as the common man (the 1860's. proven by the fact there were females on the voting register at the time).
Yeah, I'm having trouble accepting that you believe half of what you are writing, so I'm just sticking to the obvious factual errors.
There was one woman who was wrongly on the electoral register in 1867. She voted and that vote was the basis of a court case that found women's suffrage was illegal. Specifically the Great Reform Act of 1832 included the word "male" in the property requirements to vote, excluding women deliberately. I'd note that the British feminist movement was extremely active and fairly successful by this point, so it's not like even the minimal steps they had made were independent of feminist pushes for equality.
It was 1918 that women gained the vote in Britain, and then only over the age of 30. It wasn't till 1928 that women gained parity with men on voting rights.
They are payed the same, at least at the start. I will pay anyone 1000 great british pounds if they can find a job advertisement that has one wage for a female and another for a male. The difference in pay is due to the proven fact that men chase pay rises more aggressively than women, and thus receive them more often.
How many jobs have you applied for? Most advertise pay
ranges rather than a fixed salary. It turns out that women end up at the bottom of the range more often than men.
And yes, there are aggression gaps, usually down to socialisation. Women are encouraged to be less assertive and aggressive in general, and when they do push they tend to be
judged harshly for it. A woman pushing to be at the top of the pay range is less likely to get the job than a man making the same push, all other things being equal.