Gender and partisanship are closely intertwined in the American political system. A number of factors have forged an association between gender and the parties in the minds of voters. Since the 1970s, party leaders have increasingly staked out distinctive positions on policies associated with women’s rights (Sanbonmatsu 2002; Wolbrecht 2000). Demographic trends have reflected the movement of white men (especially from the South) into the Republican Party, with women shifting toward the Democratic Party, creating a robust gender gap in partisanship (Norrander 1996; Ondercin 2017). The media has reinforced these associations in its coverage of women leaders, who are disproportionately identified with the Democratic Party (e.g., Bas, van Doorn and Nelson 2018). The result is a divide between “masculine Republicans” and “feminine Democrats” wherein the Republican Party is thought to represent a masculine ethos and the Democratic Party a feminine one (Winter 2010).
These gendered associations have implications for campaigns and elections. Candidates strategize about the best ways to connect with voters, and their strategic calculus often involves stressing masculine and/or feminine traits in their campaign communications to align with the image their party values most (Bauer 2015; Bauer and Santia 2022). The media’s use of these traits to describe candidates can influence their electoral fortunes (e.g., Conroy 2015). Given the nature of the times, the associations between gender and partisanship may be more or less salient in voters' minds. For instance, research suggests masculine traits loom large in the minds of voters when national security concerns are paramount (Holman, Merolla, Zechmeister 2016). Going into the 2024 election, reproductive rights will likely be an especially prominent issue (as in 2022), which may heighten the salience of associations between gender and partisanship.
In this project, we investigated how ingrained these gender-party associations are in voters' minds to better understand the myriad ways gender influences U.S. elections. We analyzed responses to open-ended survey questions from the American National Election Studies (ANES), focusing on whether voters relied on gender traits and stereotypes when evaluating their own party as well as the opposition party. Our findings show that beliefs about gender are essentially “baked in” to conceptualizations of the parties. Specifically:
- Americans have internalized associations between gender and party, particularly between feminine traits and the Democratic Party.
- Democrats and independents are more likely than Republicans to distinguish between feminine and masculine trait associations when evaluating the parties. Republicans are more even-handed in how they apply gendered traits in their party evaluations.
- When distinguishing between positive and negative evaluations of the parties, Americans typically describe things they like about the Democratic Party using feminine traits and things they dislike about the Republican Party using masculine traits.
- The results have implications for campaign strategy, suggesting that Democrats are best served by continuing to lean into feminine traits, whereas Republicans may benefit more from a “balancing strategy” that incorporates both masculine and feminine traits.
Data and Method
The American National Election Studies are nationally representative public opinion surveys fielded before and after American elections. In presidential election years, the surveys include open-ended questions asking people if there is anything they like and dislike about the Democratic and Republican Parties. The content of these party evaluations was recorded for subsequent analysis. We rely on pooled data from the 2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020 election years for our analysis of partisanship and gendered traits. Across these years, 17,568 survey respondents provided at least one party evaluation.
We coded responses to the open-ended party likes and dislikes questions using a dictionary-based computer-automated approach to identify mentions of masculine and feminine traits. Our trait dictionary, which set parameters for identifying traits, was built and validated in several stages. First, we created a comprehensive list of traits from published research on gender stereotypes in political science and psychology. We then expanded this list by taking a random sample of responses to the party evaluation questions and identifying any traits not included in our initial list, regardless of their gendered connotations. Finally, we further expanded the list by adding synonyms for each of these traits. After developing this extensive list, we eliminated variants related to the same word stem (retaining “kind” and eliminating “kindness” for example). This resulted in 812 unique trait terms.
To verify whether these traits captured an aspect of gender, we conducted a survey in which 2,540 respondents evaluated the masculinity and femininity of each of the 812 traits. Participants were recruited from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk and paid one dollar in exchange for rating 50 words or phrases and answering demographic questions. Trait ratings were provided on seven-point Likert scales. The survey questions were formulated in the following way: The word or phrase "KIND'' describes the typical man: (1) extremely poorly to (7) extremely well; The word or phrase "KIND" describes the typical woman: (1) extremely poorly to (7) extremely well. Both the traits and type of trait rating were randomized, such that respondents evaluated some traits on masculinity and some on femininity.
We used these ratings to pare down our dictionary so that it included only traits the public viewed as clearly masculine or feminine. For example, a term like “educated” described the typical man and typical woman about equally well among our survey participants. The term “helpful,” by contrast, was rated as describing the typical woman significantly better than the typical man. In total, we identified 121 feminine traits and 117 masculine traits with clear gender connotations. The remaining traits were considered gender neutral.
Results
Differences in Party Evaluation
Across all of the party evaluation questions, 58% of the responses mentioned at least one trait. Of all the traits mentioned, 22% were feminine traits, 16.7% were masculine traits, and the remainder were gender neutral. We then examined how respondents used these traits to describe the Democratic and Republican parties. In evaluating the Democratic Party, survey respondents were significantly more likely to mention feminine (24.5%) than masculine traits (13%). Alternatively, survey respondents were more likely to mention masculine traits (20.5%) than feminine traits (18.3%) when evaluating the Republican Party. Both of these differences are statistically significant. This suggests Americans have internalized associations between gender and party and use gendered criteria in their party evaluations.
To provide a sense of which masculine and feminine traits were more commonly associated with each of the two major parties by survey respondents, we’ve included some word clouds below. Each word cloud consists of the top 50 traits used to describe each party. The size of the words corresponds to the frequency with which respondents used them in party evaluations, meaning that larger words were more common than smaller words.
Evaluating One’s Own Party versus the Opposition Party
Next, we considered whether Americans differ in the gender-based traits they used to evaluate their own party compared to the opposition party. It could be the case that Democrats emphasize feminine traits when evaluating both parties, whereas Republicans emphasize masculine traits when evaluating both parties - such that each party applies its own distinct gendered standard. Alternatively, both groups may rely on different stereotypes when evaluating their own party compared to the opposition party. We further decompose trait information in the following table to evaluate trait use across party lines and explore these possibilities.
Looking first at how people evaluated their own party, it’s clear that Democrats used feminine traits most and masculine traits least when evaluating their party; 26.7% of traits Democrats used to evaluate their party are feminine compared to 10.8%, which are masculine – a statistically significant difference. Trait use was more even-handed among Republican voters when evaluating their own party; about 20% of traits they used to describe the Republican Party were feminine and 18.8% were masculine.
Evaluations of the opposing party follow a somewhat different pattern. When Democrats evaluated the Republican Party, they used masculine traits at a significantly higher rate than feminine traits; 21.9% of Democratic respondents’ trait mentions of the Republican Party are masculine and 17% of the traits they used to describe the Republican Party are feminine). The reverse was true for Democratic respondents’ in-party evaluations. Republicans used a more comparable ratio of masculine to feminine traits when evaluating the Democratic Party, just like they did when evaluating their own party. However, Republican evaluations of the Democratic Party include a significantly smaller amount of masculine trait mentions than those included in evaluations of their own party.
The pattern of results for respondents identifying as independents is also interesting. Independents used both kinds of traits to evaluate the two major political parties but applied feminine traits significantly more often when evaluating the Democratic Party and masculine traits significantly more often when evaluating the Republican Party.
Collectively, these results suggest that party identification shapes the use of gendered party evaluations. The Democratic Party tends to be described in more feminine terms relative to the Republican Party, especially by members of the Democratic Party. Alternatively, the Republican Party tends to be described using more masculine traits, though this is true only in the evaluations of people identifying as a Democrat or an independent.
Positive and Negative Uses of Gendered Traits
Party evaluations include both positive content (what respondents like about a party) and negative content (what a respondent dislikes about a party). We looked more closely at gendered traits to see whether they were showing up more frequently in positive or negative party evaluations. The results of this analysis are provided in the next table and offer an added dimension to our understanding of gendered conceptualizations of partisanship.
Looking at our group of survey participants as a whole, we observed that when Americans evaluated the Democratic Party, they tended to apply a clear feminine standard. This is particularly true in terms of things people like about the party, wherein feminine traits were mentioned three times as frequently as masculine traits. Alternatively, things people dislike about the Democratic Party were equally likely to be articulated in masculine and feminine terms. Evaluations of Republicans tended to be more even-handed. Things people like about the party included about equal proportions of masculine and feminine traits. When it came to things people disliked about the GOP, people tended to express dislikes in significantly more masculine than feminine terms, though the magnitude of the difference is relatively modest (4.6 percentage points).
The table above also summarizes gendered party likes and dislikes based on survey respondents’ party affiliations. These figures reveal the gendered terms that respondents applied to the Democratic and Republican parties differ based on their own party affiliation. When Democrats evaluated their own party, they tended to stress feminine traits over masculine ones, especially in terms of things they like about the party. When Democrats evaluated Republicans, they were slightly more likely to mention masculine traits than feminine traits among the things they like and dislike about the party (a statistically significant difference of about five percentage points in each case).
Americans identifying as independents also commonly used feminine traits to describe things they like about the Democratic Party. By contrast, they were more likely to use masculine than feminine traits to describe their dislikes about the GOP. This asymmetry points to a modest preference for feminine traits among independent voters that may ultimately advantage Democratic candidates in elections.
Like Democrats and independents, Republicans tended to describe things they like about the Democratic party in feminine rather than masculine terms. However, they described things they dislike about the party in a more balanced fashion. Somewhat unexpectedly, Republicans did not reveal a clearly masculine standard in evaluations of their own party. This group was slightly more likely to mention feminine traits when describing things they like about their party and slightly more likely to mention masculine traits when describing things they dislike about their party.
These findings qualify the conceptualization of “feminine Democrats” and “masculine Republicans” in that we find more evidence supporting an association between feminine traits and the Democratic Party than between masculine traits and the Republican Party. Americans across the political spectrum articulated the strengths of the Democratic Party primarily in terms of feminine traits, suggesting that gender is a key aspect of the party brand. The story for the Republican Party is less clear. Americans of all partisan stripes tended to describe things they dislike about the Republican Party in slightly more masculine than feminine terms. But Republicans did not seem to view their own party in overtly masculine terms. Instead, they reported a balanced profile of positive and masculine traits.
Implications
Our results suggest that Americans apply gendered standards when evaluating political parties. The use of masculine and feminine traits was fairly common, and there were some regularities that warrant careful attention when thinking about strategic campaign communication. Based on our results, it seems safe for Democratic candidates to emphasize feminine traits in their campaigns. Democratic voters tend to articulate the things they like about the party in these terms, and these traits appeal to many independent voters (and even some Republican voters). Alternatively, Republican candidates might be wise to employ a balancing strategy (Bauer and Santia 2022), as Republican voters report favoring a mix of masculine and feminine traits. An overemphasis on masculine traits might even turn off some independent voters, who tend to articulate things they dislike about the GOP in masculine terms.
It’s worth keeping an eye on how gender intersects with partisanship in future elections. The heightened salience of abortion in 2024 following the Dobbs decision and the state-level policy changes that have ensued will likely keep gender at the forefront of voters’ minds. And, because abortion is an issue where the parties have staked out relatively distinct positions, it may be poised to reinforce conceptualizations of “feminine Democrats” and “masculine Republicans.” Our future work on this topic will extend our analysis to include the 2024 election and evaluate whether aspects of the electoral context shape the nature of gendered party evaluations over time.
Heather L. Ondercin, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Appalachian State University. Erin C. Cassese, Ph.D. is a Professor of Political Science and Communication at the University of Delaware.
Suggested Citation: Ondercin, Heather L. and Erin C. Cassese. 2024. "Do voters evaluate American political parties using masculine and feminine traits?" Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.