Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of Illustrations
- Foreword
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction: The Historical Imagination and Fault Lines in the Electorate
- Part 1 Aggressive and Subordinate Masculinities
- Part 2 Feminist Predecessors
- Part 3 Baking Cookies and Grabbing Pussies: Misogyny and Sexual Politics
- Part 4 Election Day: Rewriting Past and Future
- Part 5 The Future Is Female (?): Critical Reflections and Feminist Futures
- Epilogue: Public Memory, White Supremacy, and Reproductive Justice in the Trump Era
- Chronology
- List of Contributors
- Gender and Race in American History
13 - “I’m Not Voting for Her”: Internalized Misogyny, Feminism, and Gender Consciousness in the 2016 Election 204
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 June 2021
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of Illustrations
- Foreword
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction: The Historical Imagination and Fault Lines in the Electorate
- Part 1 Aggressive and Subordinate Masculinities
- Part 2 Feminist Predecessors
- Part 3 Baking Cookies and Grabbing Pussies: Misogyny and Sexual Politics
- Part 4 Election Day: Rewriting Past and Future
- Part 5 The Future Is Female (?): Critical Reflections and Feminist Futures
- Epilogue: Public Memory, White Supremacy, and Reproductive Justice in the Trump Era
- Chronology
- List of Contributors
- Gender and Race in American History
Summary
”I’m not voting for her.”
—A middle-aged, female, registered Democrat, as told to the author in a get-out-the-vote call in Michigan on November 8, 2016.The 2016 election was surprising in many respects. Preelection polls consistently predicted a popular and electoral win for Hillary Clinton. With the presence on the ballot of the first female major-party presidential candidate, there were many expectations that women would vote for Clinton in large numbers. According to exit polls, women of color did, in fact, follow this pattern: among this demographic, 81 percent of those with no college degree and 77 percent of those with a college degree voted for Clinton. As predicted, the majority of men (52 percent overall and 62 percent of white men) reported voting for Trump. What pollsters failed to predict, however, was the voting behavior of white women, 52 percent of whom voted for Donald Trump. When considering educational background, these numbers are even more striking: among white women, 61 percent of those without a college degree and 44 percent of those with a college degree voted for Trump. Rural white women also disproportionately supported Trump. However, despite nearly evenly split voter identification, a majority of white women have been voting Republican for president for the past 60 years, with the exception of only two presidential contests. One possible reason for inaccurate polls in 2016 is “shy Trumpers” who were not honest about their voting plans. Exit polls revealed that 18 percent of voters held an unfavorable view of both candidates and that these votes went disproportionately to Trump. There were also a large number of Obama supporters who simply did not vote in 2016. These figures raise questions not only about white women's voting behavior, but also about gender consciousness and how women view other women in leadership positions.
As I will argue, internalized misogyny, gender consciousness, and feminist consciousness all influenced women's voting behavior and activism in the election. Gender consciousness is an awareness of women's political and social interests and makes salient the status of women as women. Gender consciousness is distinct from feminist consciousness, which is an awareness and critique of gender inequalities and patriarchy.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Nasty Women and Bad HombresGender and Race in the 2016 US Presidential Election, pp. 204 - 218Publisher: Boydell & BrewerPrint publication year: 2018