well in different contexts there are some historical lessons.  If we look at Britain, women obtained property rights in marriage before the movement for full political rights for women really developed a social base (in other words, while these rights had been advocated previously, this was by individual intellectuals and small groups rather than as a mass movement of women).  We can also see in the movement for women's suffrage, a substantial group of working class women and what is interesting about these from an economic viewpoint is that many of them came from that group of women who had traditionally (in the textile areas) had a high propensity to remain single because they could earn enough to do that. 

In other words, the means of independence among working class women and the right to maintain an independent base of wealth were antecedents of the emergence of a movement for full voting rights and in turn for more expanded visions of women's right to full participation in the political and industrial sphere. 

In Ireland women also had no right to inheritance as defined in the book written by Arensberger and Kimbel during the 30's they studied life in the West of Ireland where women never truly inherited property or family farms even married women who were widowed could not inherit the family farm the husband inherited the property. This was a good way for men to expand their properties if a field of land or a farm lay adjacent to their property and their was no male heir then a match was made between the son of one farmer and the daughter in the neighbouring farm. The husband inherited  the adjacent property upon the marriage to the daughter. This was and still is something that remains the same to this day. Most Farmers or people who have property look forward to the birth of a son as this means the continuation of a family name and a heir to the property .Many Irish families were quite large hence the reason for many of the sons in the house moving away to find work or joining a religious order and becoming a priest. The daughters went into service married into property or also joined the religious orders. Despite the rights of women to vote and advances socially and economically within Ireland it is still rare for a woman to become the sole inheritor of a farm or property. However, the other side to this is many women are now in latter years becoming educated and making their own mark on society both socially and financially. I think a change in laws of inheritance would in fact strengthen the society both socially as It would give women a stronger position and an ability to make concrete decisions about the direction their life takes. They have an economic choice to be independent financially and able to run the farm without the necessity of man being present. They can also contribute equally with their male counterparts if the notion that male inheritors are better placed to ensure the continuation of a property. The loss of a family name is a small price to pay for a woman's capacity to run the farm as a thriving business. Surely the family name is lost on marriage anyway so the reasoning behind this idea or concept is indeed flawed. With the political circle and industry crying out for female input surely now is the time to change inheritance laws is long overdue .I would highly recommend the Arensberg and Kimbel  anthropological study as it gives good food for though around the social impact a woman]s ability to inherit

The following readings may give you grounding knowledge of different perspectives:

Di Matteo, L (2013). Women, Wealth and Economic Change: An Assessment of the Impact of Women's Property Law in Wentworth County, Ontario...Explorations in Economic History, Volume 50, Issue 2

Jacka, Tamara (2006) Rural Women in Urban China: Gender, Migration, and Social Change

Thank you all