The gender gap in voting patterns has tended to be exaggerated, but it now appears that it is becoming very real. The gap widens. The trend among young men and women is intensifying and radicalizing the situation. .
Perceiving a difference between men and women when casting votes in Western liberal democracies does not surprise anyone. Nonetheless, the data indicate that, in truth, these differences have not been as significant as one might expect until very recently. The reasons for this are multiple, but it is important to mention at least two of the motives that have played a significant role in this relative lack of differentiation in voting patterns (except in a few notable cases).
First, in most Western societies, women obtained the right to vote way before achieving other goals of social and economic emancipation. In this regard, a very significant number of female voters were wives and daughters conditioned by their fathers’, husbands’, or family’s ideological positioning (only if they had not been directly coerced or when they had not been given a sealed envelope with the corresponding ballot).
Second, after the Second World War, the Western hegemonic political tendencies fluctuated for a long time between moderate conservatism and progressivism with a relative approximation to social democracy. In this context, these two tendencies used to be distinguished in the so-called “social” issues, such as the right to abortion or divorce; issues of great relevance, especially, regarding female empowerment and their rights over their body and life. Still, the value of such empowerment was buried or disregarded in political debates. The spotlight was given to economic politics and social matters less tricky. Thus, the class factor and its related familial or personal interest appeared to be far more decisive in voting patterns than any other element (not to mention that, concerning the first argument presented, many women prioritized their moral convictions over their identification as women).
Nonetheless, it goes without saying that these two factors have lost importance as time has passed. This has been for different reasons.
The progressive female incorporation in the labour market, alongside a loss of influence from the Church and the family, has played a decisive role when liberating female interests.
Obviously, it is impossible to grasp this transformation without feminism. This movement is both the cause and the consequence of the phenomena previously described. The different feminist waves have pursued from the definite attainment of their rights to the conscious social analysis in which we live, outlining every trace of injustices. Hence, feminism contains in itself a feedback effect whereby greater awareness leads to a greater pursuit of rights, and more rights facilitate the recognition of previously existing injustices.
In the 19th century, the feminist fight of the British suffragettes estimated that their missing puzzle piece was the right to vote to guarantee their political representativeness. Yet, despite being an important a valuable feat, the achievement of such a right was not enough to subvert a masculine order, which would be, in time, referred to as patriarchy. The problems went deep into the marrow of the social structure.
Over time, new factors were considered to be intersecting frequently among them: racialization, class, identity and sexual orientation, and so on. All were factors that influenced in the social position of women and, therefore, were legitimate vindications. In any case, even without the inclusion of said factors, it was soon discerned that the right to vote did not end gender violence or other forms of discrimination and violence that, being more subtle than this one, kept on having a specific and fundamental weight.
This brief historical summary is necessary. How voting patterns have been changing more and more with time can only be explained through these changes.
On the one hand, women have achieved to autonomise their interests from the men around them. Obviously, this does not mean there are no common interests, but feminist politics which considered as their objective the lessening, and then elimination, of certain disparities are a differential factor. The positioning regarding abortion, the protection of parental leave, the compromise with the salary gap reduction, the pursuit against gender violence and the protection of its victims, an education with civic and feminist values… All of these and many more elements were valued when attributing the right to vote, no longer contingent to other factors, but as a section with a sense of its own.
On the other hand, this achievement of female liberation has aroused male suspicion, especially among younger men, who misunderstand the loss of certain privileges as a vulnerability of their own rights (when they don’t generally feel this subject vulnerability in itself). Consequently, a substantial sector of the young male vote is veering towards more extreme positions on the reactionary spectrum, understanding the key elements of the feminist struggle but in reverse.
As things stand, and even with certain nuances and exceptions, the voting pattern between men and women (I insist, especially among younger people), has no sign of homogenising in a shorter or longer term; rather, quite the opposite. The spiral of action and reaction seems very much alive, except if an unexpected dialectic synthesis were to happen. And even if this were the case, let’s hope it is not a renouncement of the rights achieved and a fair cause, but for the comprehension of the importance of certain equality factors and that the loss of privileges, as painful as it can be, is never unfair.
