Why aren't we talking about the real reason Trump stands to lose?
Women are turning out in stunning numbers, and it's not because of the economy.
Thank you for joining thousands that read MR every month! You can subscribe here.
Paid subscribers get access to subscriber chats, all our interviews and thoughtful essays, book club, and other paid content that helps keep us sane in these times.
A paid subscription gives you access to every post, every time, starting at just $4.50 a month!
Look, I don’t know who will win this election. I’m hopeful that it will be Harris, for reasons I’ll get to below. But if Trump loses, I abso-frickin-lutely know why.
Do you?
It can be confusing, because the press has theories all over the place. It’s so hard to call! And there are just so many factors! Right?!
The press is throwing out a lot of reasons why Trump could lose the election (or win). If you read the headlines right now (don’t recommend), these are some top contenders at the moment:
He could lose because the economy is booming; he could lose because he’s too old.
He could lose because he never accepted that he wasn’t running against Joe Biden anymore. He could lose because Harris outdid him in fundraising by 3-to-1 in the final stretch.
He could lose because of the ugly comments at his now infamous MSG rally. Or, he could lose because he incited an insurrection at the nation’s Capitol on January 6th, and a lot of people did not love that.
This last reason is cited by an opinion piece in The Hill, and I think we can all agree that’s a really good reason to lose a presidential election. Notably, the same writer opines that if Harris loses, it’s because she “failed to differentiate herself” from her predecessor, Joe Biden.
And if that wouldn’t be the ultimate double-standard, and the most mind-blowing example of the best qualified woman in the room losing to a guy who fails up, I don’t know what is!
You know what’s not in the headlines so much? Women.
And have you noticed? Women are pissed. And they have been organizing. Yet the press seems hellbent on skipping the fact that women have been screaming from the rooftops and working their asses off.
As you may remember, when Harris got the ticket, within 24 hours Black women held a fundraising event that broke Zoom and raised over $1 million. White women were inspired to followed suit a week later, and raised millions more. Then Latinas jumped in, then South East Asian women, as enthusiasm for Harris boomed.
The Harris campaign has been bolstered by a surge in activism and volunteerism, since then, led largely by women.
Why are women so mad again? Why have they been shelling out money and knocking on doors and phone banking and group texting each other nonstop about coconut memes and election anxiety??
Oh yes. It’s because anyone with a uterus stands to lose their citizenship and personhood, and the GOP devised a plan and rigged the Supreme Court to let them bleed out in order to score political points.
The mainstream media keeps reporting that this election is “defined by gender,” or is “bizarrely influenced by gender,” which frankly, drives me nuts.
As I wrote last week, I find this a very weird and irresponsible way of saying “the citizenship, humanity, and lives of anyone with a uterus are on the line if the convicted rapist and fascist in chief wins.”
But sure, speak about it like it’s a bizarre gender-reveal party for democracy, or an abstract political philosophy, instead of life and death for half the population, and much more so when you include the queer community.
As
put it in this piece: “Women—you remember them, right? Half of the population? Lost their right to bodily autonomy? Republicans made abortion illegal and then bragged about it? The GOP has been murdering women and they’re openly plotting ways to kill even more with a national abortion ban?Women have a lot to lose, and they are acting like it.
Julia Roberts gets it. The Harris campaign gets it.
This viral, late-game campaign ad for Harris-Walz depicting two women going to vote voiced over by Roberts is a work of witchy October genius. Not just because it reminds women that their vote is none of their husband’s business: “your vote is secret,” and “what happens in the booth, stays in the booth;” or even because it is absolutely trolling the hell out of Fox commentators and male conservative talking heads.
It’s genius because it hints at a sisterhood between two female voters.
In the ad, one woman is conservative-coded with a blonde bob topped by a cap that’s bedazzled with an American flag (who styled this—give them an award!) who walks into the polls with her good ol’ boy, denim-clad husband.
While in the polling booth alone, she looks up and makes eye contact with a brunette woman who is wearing no eye makeup, a plain striped sweater from the Land’s End catalogue, and twill pants that, if my trained eye serves me well, are from Everlane. We immediately understand that she is a liberal. And probably from Maine? They smile and share a knowing look as they mark their ballots.
As they exit the polls, the MAGA-esque husband exclaims: “Did you make the right choice, honey?!” and the bedazzled blonde responds, “Sure did!” while she and the Land’s End liberal lady share a secret smile.
Fox News and Newt Gingrich are railing that this tactic is absolutely diabolical, and I don’t disagree—but not because I think your vote should be any of your spouse’s damn business.
I think the ad taps into something deep—something that women know, even if many husbands, men, and the press don’t get it: that this election is about US.
So why does the press seem so hellbent on plugging its ears and avoiding the obvious fact that this election is about women?
called out the press’s head-scratching obliviousness, noting that “the talking heads of the legacy press continue to indulge this massive blind spot.” He writes: “I can’t imagine how infuriating it must be for women screaming in the middle of the street while 90 reporters ignore them to talk to three white men in an Ohio diner about the state of politics in America.”Thank you for noticing sir, and thanks for asking! I actually had this exact experience of feeling my spirit leaving my body just a few days ago, listening to an episode of “The Daily” podcast. It was on the growing gender gap between Gen Z young women who are breaking for Harris in record numbers, while Gen Z men have started to lean more Trump-Vance. It’s just one example of the larger issue of minimizing women’s stakes from the political narrative, even in “liberal” media.
The producers interview the college-age young women who—as they come of age and enter the dating pool —are basically like, “We don’t want to have our futures derailed because we can’t get birth control, and we don’t want ourselves and our friends to die because it’s legal to let us bleed out while pregnant.”
The young men who are interviewed, on the other hand, are bothered that everything is so expensive, and strangely, much airtime is given to the fact that many of them have car expertise and would like car-related jobs, but car-related jobs are in short supply in this economy. Somehow this makes them want to vote for Trump over Harris.
At no point do the producers ask the young men: What about the fact that their peers, the young women, stand to lose their citizenship, personhood, and lives? Does the fact that young women can die factor into their voting at all? What about the fact that they themselves could become fathers, whether they want to or not?
No? Just more talk about car jobs and gender roles? It feels like it would be very relevant to address the life-or-death circumstances for young women with both parties. But that doesn’t factor into the coverage.
This kind of gendered both-sidesing, also known as “false balance” that seems to equate the fact that people with uteruses can lose their lives with whatever issue is on the mind of other parties—car jobs, gender roles, tax breaks, inflation—isn’t just bad journalism. It’s unethical. It’s dangerous.
We could search for answers as to why the press maintains this terrible blind spot, and keeps overlooking and erasing women from election coverage.
One obvious answer is that the vast majority of media companies are owned by men, and controlled by men. Women make up half the world’s population yet, according to the Harvard Business Review, they are the subject of a story only a quarter of the time. Researchers from AKA consulting found that only 39% of journalists and 26% of newsroom leaders worldwide are women.
(I can attest that when I was working in newsrooms, my editors were men about 60% of the time, and the person above my editor was a man about 80% of the time, and the person above them was a man (or men) 100% of the time.)
On the other hand, the male-dominated media industry seems like only a small part of the story.
The much larger issue here is that we have been successfully sold the myth that the problems presented by childbearing and pregnancy are a woman’s problem for so long, that they barely register as part of being worthy of serious public dialogue. (Controlling women’s bodies while pregnant is worth addressing —yes, but addressing any serious problems that arise from pregnancy or the ongoing concern of childrearing thereafter—no.)
Why don’t reporters ask young men about the life-or-death nature of the election for their female peers? The common wisdom seems to say, why would they? That’s not their problem. That’s a woman’s problem.
This is preposterous, of course, first because as
points out, men (and especially young men) are responsible for 100% of unwanted pregnancies.But also, as I wrote last week, the MAGA pitch seems to be that the more women suffer, the more men benefit. That’s an obvious lie because our lives, especially our intimate bodily lives and family lives, are intertwined with one another.
And outside MAGA, the assumption seems to be that women’s suffering is merely not worthy of serious concern. Which, frankly, is not a lot better.
As
wrote earlier this week, here: “When women defend themselves against violence, they are called crazy.” And what we are experiencing right now is nothing short of political violence—and if our reacting to that violence is stereotyped as irrational and “crazy,” why report on it seriously? It’s easy to dismiss.Speaking of the press and independent feminist writing for women and about women— now is a great time to support independent feminist journalism!
Support our work with a paid subscription starting at just $4.50 a month.
Yet, in spite of women’s erasure from the narrative, here’s why I think we have reason to feel hopeful:
First, because it’s well documented that men tend to slack more when it comes to tedious chores, and women tend to get shit done, and this extends to going to the polls. As
put it, here: In a representative democracy “it matters that women are typically far less lazy than their male counterparts.”And it’s happening—women are dominating in the polls. Women are outpacing men across the country and in all the battleground states. We’re looking at a 10-point gender gap in battleground states so far. There’s a 14-point difference in Pennsylvania, a 10-point difference in Michigan, an 8-point difference in Wisconsin, and an 11-point difference in North Carolina.
Of the more than 58 million mail-in and early in-person votes that have been cast nationally, 54 percent were cast by women and 44 percent by men. This is making Republicans nervous, and it should.
And here’s the other reason I’m hopeful: Because abortion wins at the ballot box. Every. Single. Time. Abortion rights have won in every election since Roe v. Wade was overturned.
As
has scrupulously reported, Republicans have tried every dirty trick in the book to try to make abortion ballot initiatives fail, and they can’t do it. Because 80% of Americans support abortion and don’t think the government should be involved in legislating pregnancies—both Dems and Republicans.In 2022 the president of Planned Parenthood, Alexis McGill Johnson, kicked off a conservative media firestorm when she said that “abortion could save democracy.” This week we find out.
Women are holding the line
I know, it’s not over, and white women will vote for Trump in numbers that are depressingly high as they cling to the power of white supremacist patriarchy. Too much will fall to women of color and queer communities. But there are signs that even white women have gotten the memo about misogyny, and are starting to clue in that their privilege will not keep them safe.
The Harris ad was right. More women are breaking ranks and crossing party lines. The gender breakdown of likely voting patterns in this election reveals historic and stark differences between men and women in every demographic: with women supporting Harris 53% to 36%, almost precisely the mirror image of men’s preferences (they supported Trump 53% to 37% in the same poll.
And also, I have this to report: If you’ve been here a while you know that I was raised in a conservative community in the stalwartly red and Republican state of Utah. And in the last 72 hours I’ve seen things that I’ve never seen before. Not even in 2020.
I’ve seen a social media post from the wife of a former Mormon bishop who was a registered Republican. She posted with her “I Voted” sticker, and announced that she voted for Harris. She wrote a lengthy caption about preserving democracy and implored others to do the same.
I’ve seen posts from two young women that I know who grew up in conservative households who posted images of themselves canvassing for Harris. Both of them are probably the first women in their families to vote blue in at least three generations.
A friend from a red state that I’ve known since childhood posted an image of her college-age daughter canvassing for Harris. This young woman formerly worked for a Republican legislator, and was now pictured smiling in front of a wall of “Stop Trump” signs behind her from the local Harris campaign office.
“From my daughter to yours—thank you,” I messaged my friend.
This stuff is bringing me to tears, y’all.
By the way, an activist group of Mormon women that formed in alarmed response to Trump, called “Mormon Women for Ethical Government” is now actively suing the Republican Utah legislature over gerrymandering.
I’m in group chats for two phone banking and text banking groups from Mobilize (highly recommend) and the chats are chock full of people across the country who are pitching in to help.
There are grandmas from Wisconsin, and there are young men from Oxnard California, all making calls and pumping each other up. It’s glorious. Are you surprised that the number of women-coded names in these volunteer groups outnumber the men by two to one?
An MR reader has been posting that she’s been driving with her family to Pennsylvania every weekend to knock doors. This is an act of bravery as she and her partner are lesbians, and one of her children is trans. She reports that it’s been going great.
A friend and reader from Michigan just messaged me her “I voted” photo. She took her family, including the elderly who needed help with transportation. In the photo, she’s wearing red lipstick and has an almost triumphant expression on her face. “I don’t think anyone wants to be accused of celebrating early, but I felt so happy after I voted. It feels good to know that you used your power for good in a war against evil.”
In the coming days they are going to tell us that we are divided, and there will be white-knuckling and worry and blame that we let each other down. There will be claims that we don’t care about each other.
And I’m looking around and I’m here to tell you that it’s not true. Maybe the press and the history books won’t record it, but the women f*cking showed up.
We are almost there. Vote blue, y’all. Vote like our lives and democracy depend on it. Take your family and friends. We got this!
I hope that you feel a little better and are ready to vote for a woman for president! This newsletter exists because of you—thank you. If this resonated, please hit the “like” button, comment, share it with someone else—that helps our work find more readers.
Speaking of the press and independent feminist journalism that actually centers women— now is a great time to support our work.
You can support our work with a paid subscription starting at just $4.50 a month.
MATRIARCHY REPORT is written by Lane Anderson and Allison Lichter.
Lane Anderson is a writer, journalist, and Clinical Associate Professor at NYU who has won fellowships and many SPJ awards for her writing on inequality and family social issues. She has an MFA from Columbia University. She was raised in Utah and lives in New York City with her partner and young daughter.
Allison Lichter is associate dean at the Newmark Graduate School of Journalism at the City University of New York. She has been a writer, producer and editor for radio and print, covering the arts, politics, and the workplace. She was born and raised in Queens, and lives in Brooklyn with her partner and daughter.
Thank you for documenting all the hopefulness -- and action-- that is out there! It is so important to see all the places where change is happening and what's driving it!
Thank you. I love this. I own the world's largest website devoted to names, whose visitors are mostly expectant parents and young female name lovers, and for the first time in our 16-year-history wrote a public political endorsement of Kamala, of course https://nameberry.com/blog/why-you-should-vote-for-kamala-harris. It's a risky business move, as many of our 100,000 daily visitors have canceled their subscriptions most due to their pro-life beliefs. But morally I believed it was my duty to speak out on the forum I have in favor of Kamala Harris and women's rights, and many more of our visitors have thanked me for it. We've been too afraid for too long and I very much appreciate everything you said.