By Donja Tavakolinia

The Puzzle of the Vote

More than 40% of women casted their ballots in favor of the Republican Party and thus Donald Trump in the 2024 U.S presidential election. This paradox of women voting for a leader who has a well-documented history of misogynistic remarks, raised eyebrows across the political spectrum and perhaps even more in the hearts and minds of other liberal, feminist women. One could ask themselves why women would support a president who blatantly disregards their rights and dignity. Did Trump’s campaign promises, such as his calls for strong leadership and nativism, influence many female voters to overlook his behavior? 

This blog post seeks to discuss and analyze what visions of femininity and sexuality Trump evokes that resonate with his female voters and align with traditional gender roles. Often Trump’s rhetoric invokes nostalgic ideas of gendered power dynamics. This appeals to his female voters’ desire for a return to what they might perceive as a stable, familiar, societal order. According to data from Cambridge University, almost 9 out of 10 Trump voters believe that America’s values and traditions are under threat. In a world where modern gender dynamics may feel threatening, this appeal to traditional femininity and its relationship with masculinity might offer his female voters a sense of security. Ultimately, understanding why certain women supported Trump requires recognizing how these gender visions provide perceived stability, despite their anti-feminist undertones. 

Trump’s Vision of Traditional Femininity

Donald Trump’s rhetoric often casts women the role of caregivers, emphasizing their qualities as nurturers vital to the American family and society. As Cynthia Cockburn argues, traditional gender roles—where women are cast as nurturers and men as protectors—are deeply entrenched in militarized and patriarchal structures. In times of uncertainty, these gendered norms can offer a sense of stability. However, this form of security ultimately reinforces systems of dominance and exclusion, reducing women’s agency and autonomy. This binary view of men as strong leaders and women as nurturing caretakers, seems to have found a receptive audience among female voters. 

In times of uncertainty, when people experience personal and societal insecurities, these traditional roles can offer comfort and clarity. This might sound insane to us readers who, hopefully, rather urge that these traditional roles are a part of the personal insecurity we ourselves experience under the state. However, for many women aligning with this traditional vision of femininity, it provides a sense of purpose and identity, aligning with Trump’s famous one-liner “Make America Great Again”, which promises to restore security amidst the shifting cultural landscape.

“The feminine mystique says that the highest value and the only commitment for women is the fulfillment of their own femininity” 

Betty Friedan in her book The Feminine Mystique, wrote this statement and claimed it to be found in “only (…) sexual passivity, male domination, and nurturing maternal love”. The concept of internalized sexism has been spoken on arguably since Mary Wollstonecraft and has been adopted by the Feminist Security Studies (FSS), and it sheds light on why some women might embrace gender roles that ultimately perpetuate inequality. 

In the context of Trump’s rhetoric, his framing of femininity is a clear example of this dynamic at play. He presents a vision of women that emphasizes beauty, grace, and submission—traits that align with traditional ideals of femininity as well as reducing women’s agency and autonomy. While Trump’s language can seem empowering to some women, it also reinforces the idea that a woman’s worth is tied to her physical appearance and her capacity to conform to a predefined image of what it means to be feminine. This rhetoric can be appealing to women who feel secure in the clarity and simplicity of these roles, even though they limit their broader social and political potential. 

Security and Feminism: The Larger Tension

As discussed, Trump’s vision of femininity and sexuality, goes beyond cultural nostalgia and offers a sense of security for his female voters. However, for the FSS and most likely other female voters in the U.S, this vision of security is deeply flawed. Laura Sjöberg argues for redefining security to focus on human autonomy and equality, rather than the rigidity of traditional gender roles. For feminists, true security lies not in dependency on rigid societal norms but in the freedom to define one’s identity independently of societal constraints. This approach to security challenges the notion that stability comes from maintaining outdated gender expectations. The idea of security as stability within rigid roles is countered by the feminist belief that real security arises from the ability to make choices based on personal agency, not societal prescription.

As we reflect on this tension, a critical question arises: Can feminism offer alternative visions of security—ones that resonate as strongly as traditional roles do for some women? Can we imagine forms of security rooted in autonomy, equality, and personal empowerment that appeal to a broader spectrum of women, particularly those who may feel threatened by the destabilizing effects of progressive change?

Beyond the Puzzle

In the end, the phenomenon of women voting for Trump is not just a reflection of political alignment; it is deeply rooted in cultural narratives surrounding femininity and security. Trump’s rhetoric taps into a vision of womanhood that promises stability through traditional gender roles, offering a sense of security in an uncertain world. For some women, these roles represent a return to a time when life seemed simpler, and most importantly, secure.

However, this sense of security is complex and often tied to a narrow, restrictive view of gender roles. The challenge lies in redefining what security means in a modern, feminist context—one that emphasizes autonomy, equality, and empowerment for all women. Can we, as a society, offer alternative visions of security that don’t rely on traditional roles but instead embrace a future where women are free to define their own identities?

---

Further suggestions: If the reader finds themselves not agreeing with the approx. 40% of Trump’s female voters, I urge you to listen to Labour by Paris Paloma. As well as reading the books mentioned in this post by Betty Friedan and Mary Wollstonecraft, or even Le Deuxième Sexe by Simone de Beaviour.