Politics & Gender has a free online issue for the next month.
https://twitter.com/PoliticsGenderJ/status/1233065626387779584
One article is " Gendered Nationalism and the 2016 US Presidential Election: How Party, Class, and Beliefs about Masculinity Shaped Voting Behavior" by Erin Deckman and Melissa Cassesse.
We examine which Americans were likely to believe that American society has grown “too soft and feminine,” a concept we have characterized as gendered nationalism, and how such gendered nationalist attitudes influenced voting behavior in the 2016 presidential race. Our analysis shows that party, gender, education, and class shaped attitudes about gendered nationalism: Republicans, men, and members of the working class were more likely to support gendered nationalist views. We identify a strong, significant relationship between gendered nationalist attitudes and the probability of voting for Donald Trump, even after controlling for partisanship, ideology, race, religion, and other factors. Moreover, gender differences in candidate support were largely driven by gender differences in beliefs that the United States has grown too soft and feminine. Our research adds to the growing scholarly evidence indicating that gendered beliefs are likely to have a bigger impact on American political behavior than a voter’s gender alone.
Here’s their conclusion (and you can usually skip methodology in academic articles and skip straight to the conclusions, then read backwards if you need to understand something, unless you are reading with an academic purpose):
Donald Trump won the presidency with one of the largest gender gaps recorded in modern American presidential election history. Yet our mediation analysis shows that once we controlled for gendered beliefs, specifically support for the notion that America had become too soft and feminine, gender differences in vote choice were not significant. Instead, holding more nationalist views helped to shape voters’ decisions in 2016. Although our analysis supports the notion that Trump’s overtly masculine, chauvinistic campaign style did appear to have an impact for many men, it likely held appeal for conservative women as well.
Our mediation analysis also shows that differences in vote choice between college-educated voters and those with less than a college degree were also linked to gendered nationalism. When gendered nationalism is included in our vote-choice model, the liberalizing effect of a college degree was eliminated.
This gives some intellectual backing to my distaste for the toxicity of bro culture and negative attitude towards those who complain about the feminization of America.
