I say that if the inevitable side effect of votes for women is women swearing like sailors, being treated like dirt by their menfolk, and sleeping around like whores, with the secondary side effects of teen mothers, broken families, children like walking wounded in the divorce-torn hellscape of modern life, and abortion rates as horrific as pyramids of skulls collected by the Aztecs, then be damned to votes for women. If that is the trade off, it is a bad bargain.
The woman can vote, but she cannot keep a man from walking into the locker room when she is changing. She can vote, but she cannot vote into effect a law to prevent her daughter from killing her granddaughter in the womb for any reason or no reason. She can vote, but cannot vote for a state law to protect her from illegal aliens. She can vote, but a bureaucrat decides the nature and amount of her medical care, and whether she is forced to buy contraceptives and aborticides for employees. She gets no vote on those things.
Her great grandmother could chop down a tree on her own land and build a shed, or burn the wood in her own hearth, or slaughter a chicken, or bake and sell cookies, or give food to the poor, without asking leave or let from the government. By any rational measure, her great grandmother was more free than is she now, vote or no vote.