Last November’s Presidential election was not only surprising, but eye opening. But not in the way that you think. While I am still distraught over the results, it made me realize that the world is definitely not as modernized as it should be in 2025.
While the right likes to give credit for the Trump win to men, pointing out that men are upset because they feel emasculated in this modern world. The left likes to blame the Harris loss on racism and misogyny. While those reasons may be true for many of the voters, I don’t think that was true for the majority of voters.
There had to be something else for people to turn away from a highly qualified candidate with no negatives, who was more qualified, who had more morals, who dedicated her life to public service, and basically would do a better job. Instead, they voted from someone who is a bully, lacked morals, who constantly pushed the line on what is legal, offended everyone, and has little knowledge of government.
(I don’t have room in this post to go into all his fraudulent business crimes and sexual assault issues. Listing all his negatives would take waaaaay too long.)
YET, voters chose this flawed man over the better candidate. Why?
I know many people who voted for Trump –Some Democrats, many independents, some first-time voters, some elderly on Social Security/Medicare. Why would all these people vote for Trump when he repeatedly campaigned on issues that went against their best interest. Even when Trump and his VP Vance were linked to the HIGHLY controversial Project 2025 plan, voters still insisted that “he will never implement those recommendations”. They blindly followed him to the voting booth.
(I am not going to go into all the issues here, because that is not the point of my post, but wanted to mention that many people blindly voted against their best interest)
YET, people chose this flawed man over a candidate that would support the issues that are important to them. Why?
What I think happened was pure unadulterated and unapologetic SEXISM.
Not many pundits have talked about this and if they have it was in a side note to the racism talking points that seem to flood the liberal analysis of the election. Others seem to imply that it had to do with misogyny and how young men hated woman, but would back away from an discussion on simple sexism. But it was not discussed seriously or intentionally without being linked to racism. It was rarely mentioned on TV, or in the news, or on the internet. There was a good article referring to it BEFORE the election ( “Why Gender may be the Defining Issue of the Election” NYTIMES, October 23, 2024), but not much after the election.
I tried many times to bring this topic up within my own social circle and the Dems/liberals would always go straight to “it’s all about racism yadda, yadda, yadda…”. A few would say Misogyny played a part, but misogyny is not sexism as I will get to later.
Consider the Numbers
Let’s start with looking at the election numbers.
Source: Wikipedia 2008, 2012, 2016, 2020, 2024
Racism can’t be the main reason for the Harris loss, because simply….. “OBAMA”. President Obama got elected twice without having to earn the racist vote. If race was the main issue for most voters when choosing a President, then OBAMA would never have gotten elected by such a large victory (2008 52.9%, 2012 51.1%). Harris, as a candidate, was actually more qualified than Obama was when he ran, so qualifications should not have been an issue. Although racist voters do exist, they will never vote for any non-white candidate no matter their credentials, so we can leave them out of the discussion. The truly racist voter was a small slice of the voter pie and did not have a large effect in 2008 or 2012. Harris’s loss was due to losing a portion of the non-racist voters that once were pro-Obama
So, why did these non-racist voters who previously voted for OBAMA, turn and vote for Trump over Harris?
Remember Hillary
Think back to when Hillary Clinton ran for president not only back in the 2016 election, but all the way back to the 2008 primaries. Remember how she was treated? The press, men, women, all made fun of her hair, her clothes, the way she spoke, etc. The called her unqualified when she actually had more experience in government than the other candidates including Obama, who was a 1st term senator. It screamed sexism at the time, and many excused it. It didn’t help that everyone referred to her by her first name (including me) so that we could distinguish her from Bill. I was crushed back in 2008 when she could not get through the primary with all her amazing qualifications. I lost friends over that election because they could not understand why my desire for the first woman president was stronger than their desire for the first Black president. I was called racist more times than I could count. It irks me to no end when people automatically point to racism as the cause and ignore the issue of sexism in both the Hillary Clinton and the Harris losses.
Then came 2016. This was going to be the year! Our first women president! But it was not to be. The shock was almost too much to bear. Rather than talk about the sexism, again everyone blamed her previous votes in the senate, her views on the issues, etc.
But a strange thing happened in 2016, Hillary actually WON the popular vote, by almost 3 million votes (see chart above), but did not win the electoral college. She held almost the same number of votes that Obama got in 2012, so it was not because she lost the core Democrat support. Trump brought in more votes than Romney in 2012 from some key states (which is why he won the electoral college). Trump brought in a new type of voter who maybe never voted before and did not want a woman for President. There was also a major 3rd party effect that same year where the Libertarian party and the Green Party outperformed more than in any other year prior or since. Any increase in voters that the Democrats brought to the polls who wanted the first woman president was negated by the sexist anti-Hillary 3rd party voter who just “did not like her” and who couldn’t stomach voting for Trump. So they cast a throw away vote for the Green Party or the Libertarian party. These voters were anti-Trump and anti-Hillary even though they may have liberal leanings. The 3rd party voter had more of an impact in the swing states of Michigan and Pennsylvania which led to the electoral win for Trump. (Look at the states results on the Wikipedia pages 2008, 2012, 2016, 2020, 2024)
No that does not counter the sexism argument because Jill Stein was a woman.. Voting for Jill Stein was actually giving into the sexism. Jill Stein was just a name and could never win.
And….. Hillary lost to Trump who was unknown. Voters did not know yet what Trump was like or what ridiculous things he would do and attempt to do. People could claim to vote against Hillary based on her prior political record because Trump did not have a political background or a record. It was choosing the unknown. They could consciously or unconsciously find any reason to vote for Trump as long as it wasn’t Hillary. Those who disliked Trump, and who couldn’t get past voting for Hillary went for 3rd party.
The Biden Win
Then came Biden (see chart for numbers). Biden had HUGE support and won with a mandate. Considering the craziness during Trumps first term and the unpopular programs he was pushing, it should be no surprise that Trump loss by this much. (Probably why the stop the steal folks got so pissed off. Poor losers nearly cost us our democracy!)
When Biden dropped out of the race, Harris was presumed to do as well as Biden did in 2020. But some voters stayed home, and Trump over performed big time (or is it Bigly?). Even though voters knew him now, knew what he stood for, knew exactly how he would act as President, they voted for him. Even though many Trump voters don’t support the Project 2025 that the Republicans are pushing, they still voted for him. How?
I do believe if Biden was still in the race and did not step aside for the 2024 race, he would have won the election.
Even in the liberal bastion where I live, I know many people (Dems, independents) who voted this way.
- 2008 Obama
- 2012 Obama
- 2016 Trump or 3rd party
- 2020 Biden
- 2024 Trump
(Yes, I know that my world is only a small part of the country, but I feel it represents the country as a whole.)
Really, WHY!!!
If Trump was not good enough to earn your vote in 2020, how can you possibly vote for him after the insurrection and all the other crazy stuff he did in his campaign. It is like we are living in Bizarro World. When Harris lost to Trump, voters knew exactly what they were getting. Trump would always pull in the Racist voters, but a larger part of the non-racist voters chose a flawed man over a woman candidate who was well qualified. Again….they did it again! You can’t blame it on the “hatred for Hillary” factor that everyone used for reasoning in the 2016 loss.
Do all male candidates come before any women candidates?
Sexism vs Misogyny
This past election the word Misogyny was thrown around A LOT. And yes, there was a lot of misogynistic behavior everywhere especially on the internet. While misogyny has always been around in different forms, there is a new outspoken, accepted version of it that is not prevalent in our society.
However, Misogyny is NOT sexism. Let’s start with the definition.
From dictionary.com:
sexism is defined as “discrimination based on sex or gender, or the belief that men are superior to women.” A person can be sexist either consciously or subconsciously, especially when it comes to the economic, political, or social discrimination of women. Take, for instance, the rhetoric used to describe a female politician. While a man may be described as speaking with “passion” or “confidence,” a woman who speaks in the same manner may be described as “bossy” or “shrill.” Furthermore, a female politician is more likely to be criticized for what they wear. Someone may doubt that a woman can be a politician, yet they can claim that they still love and admire women.
misogyny, which refers specially to the hatred of women. The word is formed from the Greek roots misein (“to hate”) and gynē (“woman”). Misogyny is a blatant disregard for women; while someone who is sexist may still be opposed to the fact that women make 78 cents to the dollar, a misogynist will believe that women don’t deserve equal pay because they are inherently lesser than men. Misogyny has been prevalent since Ancient Greece, it was a salient topic in Western philosophy, and it continues today in the objectivization and violence toward women.
Sexism is believing men are SUPERIOR to women (better than woman).
Misogyny is a hatred of women, where women are undeserving because they are less than a man.
See the difference? One is a positive attitude coming from a winner mentality. The other is a negative attitude coming from a loser mentality where they think they are robbed of something.
Sexism has been around since the beginning of time, supported by religion and society in general. However, over the past 100 years, women have proven themselves to be equals and can be just as successful as any man in any field. We are just as smart, just as hardworking, and just as capable.
Men used to believe that the weakest man was still superior to the strongest woman. (weak and strong in reference to strength, intelligence, ingenuity, creativity, self-sufficiency, etc). They were on top of the pyramid with woman as subservient. As woman advanced in all areas of life over the years, men now know that this is not true. Some men could not handle the fact that they now have women as true peers, as equals and react with hostility resulting in the up-rise of misogyny.
The strides women have made in confronting sexism has led to sexism morphing into Misogyny.
The Trump Effect
Trump disrupted our society and made it acceptable for all men, not just white men to act misogynistic and to emerge as victims. He did this by using misogyny and victimhood to defend himself in all his court cases, in the press, and for any negative accusation made against him. AND it worked, so he kept doing it. He felt better about himself, and many men looked at that and jumped on that bandwagon. Men, learned from that, so to make up for shortcomings they had in some parts of their lives, started declaring that today’s society is emasculating and that they long for the days were “men got to be men”. Even Mark Zuckerberg has now chimed in and said that offices need more masculine energy.
What exactly does that mean?
Does every work place have to revert back to the time prior to the 1970s when Men could treat women with any amount of disrespect like the “good ol’ days where sexual harassment was common. Do they want to act like frat boys complete with dirty jokes in the workplace? Of course not. Most men would say no to that.
What it sounds like to me is that if there are women who are more successful than you, a man, that you feel emasculated. That you feel that women are taking success from you and they are undeserving. You long for the days where men were superior regardless of their ability, contributions, or successes. That men come first, that they are the decision makers and that they should get opportunities before women. And if you are a white man….you feel the same way about the minorities. Do I have that right?
well I have news for you. Women have spent years fighting for equality…. fighting for equal pay, equal rights, and equal respect. Women have been considered less then-a type of second-class citizen- for far too long. Just because we have (will have?) equality, that does not have bearing on men’s status in society. It should be an additional status not in place of a man’s status. But for some reason men think that they can only feel like a man if they are superior and women are inferior. That equality of women takes away their power.
I don’t understand this. A real man should not feel emasculated by a strong woman any more than if he was dealing with a strong man. But today, men seem to be declaring that the feel emasculated by today’s world where WOMEN are strong and prominent in the workplace. Men compete with other men, but if they compete with women, they feel emasculated. Losing out to a woman in the workplace is emasculating to them? Really? Losing to a man or woman should be the same. Society is not making you feel emasculated, your ego is. Success is for those that earn it on an even playing field, not a gender biased field.
Many pundits have discussed the “emasculation issue” as if it is something that is legitimate, that we need to do something about this, that we are losing a generation of young men. Let me be clear it is NOT LEGITIMATE. It is not ok for men to say that their success is contingent on women stepping aside and allowing men “to feel good about themselves”. There is nothing that we need to do to help them get through this. There is nothing we should do to change the workplace or change the laws to allow workplaces to treat men preferentially.
If women’s equality makes you feel emasculated or less than a man, then suck it up, buttercup!
If women’s equality makes you feel emasculated or less than a man, then suck it up, buttercup!
Stop contributing to conscious and unconscious SEXISM
All in our society can help to recognize sexism by recognizing your part. When you meet people, whether in an interview, or at a party, or in public. Recognize how you respond to them. Where you start with your initial impression is everything. Men tend to get the benefit of the doubt and are thought of highly with the first impression. Let’s say most start with a 10 out of 10. More interaction has you adjust your impression of them downward depending on how smart, or friendly, or competent you think they are. Women on the other hand tend to have a lower starting point, let’s say a 6. She has to prove herself to you before you can raise your impression of her. When you are in a situation meeting new people, try and recognize how you handle this situation and if you are unconsciously giving men the benefit of the doubt just because they are men. Don’t automatically give men respect and make women earn it. Make both earn it or start at the same level.
Making both earn it could be the reason why many young men feel emasculated. They want to start out at the top because they think they deserve that starting point. They only have to work to stay there, not to get there like women do.
Now get me wrong, this is not all on men. Women can be sexist too, and I actually feel more sexist at times. They can actually be a little misogynistic when defending their sons. Especially if they are religious or are born prior to the Gen X generation (boomer and prior).
How you were raised is everything
I am a Gen Xer and we were raised with the mentality that you work hard for success in anything you attempt (sports, challenges, job/career). If you fail or lose the game, you just get back up and study harder, practice more, etc. Success is not guaranteed due to outside influences that may have an effect on the outcome.
However, Millennials and Gen Yers were raised with a whole lot of self-esteem. I actually think too much self-esteem. They deserved to win because they put in EFFORT. Strong effort is what matters and that should lead to success automatically. That is how we have gotten grade inflation in schools and participation trophies. If they view their competition as putting in less effort and the competition won, then they feel robbed. Even if the winner was smarter, more prepared and better at the task. It is all about perception. That someone who they think is undeserving won instead of them is unimaginable. The new parenting has created this situation. Their sons grew up thinking they were entitled and became sore losers. Their daughters grew up thinking we get to compete on the field to prove ourselves. They are happy they get to play at all. See the difference? It has created the misogyny.
DEI
There are DEI offices and policies in every workplace and I feel that it is a failed initiative. I believe its failure is based in how they set up the program. DEI is supposed to cover, racism, LGBTQ, sexism, ageism, equity of everyone, but it doesn’t. Almost all programs that I have seen give training on racism and LGBTQ, but ignore sexism and ageism (which I happen to feel is very important since the acceptance of sexism and ageism is so ingrained in our society). Sexism and ageism is just presumed to be acceptable. Maybe the programs would have branched out to cover these in the future, but I don’t think so. I am not sad to have Trump get rid of the initiative. I just don’t like how he is threatening institutions and use it for other purposes. Trump is going to use the failed DEI initiative as a push back against civility, resulting in a return to a time of vocalized bigotry.
We must acknowledge that not everything is equal between men and women
Pete Hegseth, Trump’s pick for Secretary of Defense, has said that he feels that women should not be in combat roles in the military. When challenged on this with the facts that we have some very talented women pilots in the military, he specifically criticized having women in roles that involved strength. On the surface most people would say, that makes sense. But it doesn’t. Here is a great article on the topic. (Trump’s defense secretary pick said women shouldn’t be in combat roles. Time, Nov 14, 2024) The issue is not necessarily men vs women. It is who is strong enough to do the job.
US Army veteran Elizabeth Beggs said women in military service have already proven they’re capable. “Let’s not get it twisted. Women have been in combat since the beginning of history,” Beggs said. But she does agree with Hegseth on one thing: “Not all women are capable – just like not all men are capable,” Beggs said. (Trump’s defense secretary pick said women shouldn’t be in combat roles. Time, Nov 14, 2024)
The reason that Hegesh is being sexist is because of the presumption of strength. Is the weakest man stronger than the strongest woman? I think not. There are some really wimpy men out there and some really strong women. The answer is to not ban women from combat roles, it is to have a test with a passing level that is realistic. A level where not all men will pass and some women will. If the armed forces are desperate for recruits, you don’t automatically advance a man that failed the test, you evaluate them by their scores not by their gender. No sexism. win win.
Sexism is based on the false premise that all men come before any woman. Forcing round pegs into square holes does not solve that problem. Women don’t need a hand up to perform in jobs. They need an even playing field where they get to compete. Sexism can only be eliminated if the correct solutions are in place for everyone to be judged fairly.
Final Thoughts on the 2024 Election
Trump’s inauguration is tomorrow. I am not going to watch. I still can’t believe that he won. I used to be a strong activist, but this time around I am not going to waste my time marching and campaigning for a public that intentionally voted for that guy. His vote totals went UP during this election. He did not win because of a low turnout. People wanted him. (Except for posting on this blog. It is sort of therapeutic for me.) At this point I believe that we will get our first Gay (male) President before the USA will elect a woman.
There is the old saying that “elections have consequences”. I am actually hoping that there are some consequences, so that people will appreciate their vote in the future. They need to see that if a candidate actually says that they are going to do “A”, that they mean it. If you vote for them, you get “A”. I just hope that the consequences I feel are coming, will be reversible.
-MOTL
“This is not a men vs women issue. It’s about people vs prejudice.”
~Laura Bates