Millions of Women Voted Trump

Beyond the ‘Access Hollywood’ Tape

The 2016 US Presidential election was a watershed moment, not least because of the victory of Donald Trump. This victory became even more perplexing for many when considering the “Access Hollywood” tape, released just weeks before the election. In it, as highlighted in world news reports and on Wikipedia, Trump appeared to boast in crude terms about the act of grabbing women ‘by the pussy‘. The shockwaves were palpable. Yet, millions of women cast their ballots for him. How can we reconcile this apparent contradiction? Understanding this dissonance is crucial, not just for political analysis, but for gaining a deeper understanding of the complex tapestry of human motivation, particularly regarding gender, power, and belief systems.

To truly grasp this phenomenon, we must move beyond simplistic labels and delve into a multi-faceted analysis encompassing psychological, emotional, gendered, sociological, political, and even spiritual dimensions.

Psychological Perspectives: Cognitive Dissonance and Motivated Reasoning

Psychologically, cognitive dissonance plays a significant role. When people are confronted with information that clashes with their existing beliefs (like supporting a candidate who apparently admits to questionable behaviour), they experience discomfort. To reduce this discomfort, they may employ motivated reasoning. This involves unconsciously downplaying the negative information, reinterpreting it, or focussing on other aspects that align with their pre-existing preference for Trump.

For some women, the tape may have been dismissed as “locker room talk,” a regrettable but ultimately inconsequential flaw in an otherwise desirable leader. Others might have rationalised it by focussing on his apology (however perceived) or believing it was a politically motivated smear campaign. Furthermore, the “sunk cost fallacy” could have been at play. For those already leaning towards Trump, admitting the tape changed their minds would require acknowledging they might have been wrong initially – a psychologically challenging admission.

Emotional Drivers: Anger, Frustration, and a Desire for Change

Emotionally, Trump tapped into potent sentiments of anger and frustration. For some women, particularly those in rural areas or working-class backgrounds, traditional politics had seemingly failed them. They might have felt ignored by mainstream narratives, experiencing economic anxieties, cultural displacement, or a sense of losing ground. Trump, despite his flaws, presented himself as an outsider, a disrupter, a voice for the forgotten.

This emotional appeal transcended gender. For women feeling disenfranchised, Trump offered a promise of radical change, a rejection of the status quo they perceived as detrimental to their lives. His strong, often aggressive, rhetoric resonated as strength and decisiveness, qualities some women valued amidst perceived societal weakness or political correctness.

Gendered Dynamics: Internalised Patriarchy and Differing Feminist Frameworks

The gender lens offers perhaps the most complex insights. While it might seem counterintuitive for women to support someone seemingly disrespectful to women, gender dynamics are not monolithic. Some women may have internalised patriarchal norms, viewing male dominance as natural or even desirable in leadership. This isn’t necessarily conscious misogyny, but rather a reflection of deeply ingrained societal structures where male authority is normalised, and women may prioritise other qualities in a leader, even at the expense of gender equality.

Furthermore, feminist frameworks are diverse. Not all women subscribe to the same definition of feminism or prioritise the same feminist issues. For some, economic security, religious freedom, or national security might have been prioritised over issues of gender representation or poor conduct in this particular election. They might have believed Trump’s policies would better serve their families and communities, even if his personal behaviour was objectionable.

Sociological Context: Identity, Community, and Cultural Values

Sociologically, voting is rarely an isolated individual act. It’s often influenced by social networks, community values, and group identity. For many women, particularly in conservative communities, voting for Trump was aligned with their social identity and cultural values. Family, friends, and religious communities often played a significant role in shaping political views.

In these contexts, loyalty to the Republican party, which Trump represented, and the associated conservative values, might have outweighed the negative impact of the “Access Hollywood” tape. Focussing on issues like abortion, religious freedom, or traditional family values, often central to conservative platforms, could have eclipsed concerns about Trump’s personal conduct. Furthermore, the increasing polarisation of society and the rise of echo chambers can reinforce pre-existing beliefs and minimise dissenting viewpoints, even about a deeply controversial issue.

Political Strategy and Pragmatism: Policy Preferences and Supreme Court Appointments

Politically, many women are highly pragmatic voters. They weigh policy platforms, party affiliation, and potential consequences of their vote. For some women, Trump’s policy positions on issues like the economy, immigration, or national security were more important than his personal conduct. They might have strategically voted for him, believing he would be a more effective leader on these issues, even if they disapproved of the tape.

Crucially, the Supreme Court appointments were a major factor for many conservative voters, including women. The promise of conservative justices was a powerful motivator, particularly for those prioritising issues like abortion rights. For these women, the potential long-term impact of Supreme Court decisions might have outweighed the immediate concern about Trump’s past behaviour.

Spiritual Considerations: Forgiveness, Redemption, and Moral Priorities

Finally, exploring spiritual dimensions offers another layer of understanding. For some women, particularly those from faith-based communities that emphasise forgiveness and redemption, Trump’s apology (however imperfect) might have been accepted at face value. Religious beliefs often prioritise forgiveness and the potential for personal transformation. Focussing on these principles could allow some women to overlook or minimise the significance of the tape, believing in the possibility of Trump’s repentance or seeing it as a past transgression no longer relevant.

Furthermore, for some religious voters, certain moral issues, like abortion or religious freedom, are considered paramount. Their spiritual framework might prioritise these issues above all else politically, leading them to support a candidate who aligns with their views on these matters, even if that candidate exhibits flaws in other areas.

Moving Forward: Beyond Simplification

The fact that millions of women voted for Donald Trump despite the “Access Hollywood” tape is not easily explained. It’s a complex phenomenon rooted in a confluence of psychological biases, emotional needs, gendered societal structures, sociological influences, political pragmatism, and even spiritual beliefs. It’s a reminder that women are not a monolithic voting bloc, and their motivations are as diverse and nuanced as their individual experiences.

Importantly, understanding this phenomenon is not about condoning or excusing bad behaviour. It’s about fostering a more nuanced and empathetic understanding of the electorate, recognising the diverse factors that shape political decisions, and moving beyond simplistic narratives that fail to capture the complexities of human motivation. Only then can we engage in more productive conversations about gender, power, and the kind of society we wish to build. Instead of dismissing these women, we need to listen, understand, and engage with the multifaceted reasons behind their choices, however uncomfortable they might be. This is crucial for bridging divides and building a more inclusive and truly representative democracy.