Trump supporters- "[L]ike refusing to bathe, blowing your nose in your hands or farting loudly on purpose"
Let's face it- Male Trump supporters aren't great marriage prospects
Gen Z is still relatively young, and the Trump-era divisions between single men and women might yet reverse themselves. But there’s a good chance they won’t, particularly if Mr. Trump manages to inject the body politic with his distinct brand of existential dread during and after the 2024 elections. It is worth thinking both ahead of and beyond Mr. Trump. A cultural shift might be necessary — one that views politics as a part of people’s identity but far from the most important part. Americans’ ability to live together, quite literally, might depend on it.
In a perfect world, Left-leaning women wouldn’t have to worry about the political inclinations of men they date. Unfortunately, as we see daily, our world is currently significantly sub-optimal. And for an ideologically Left-leaning woman to date a Trump supporter…well, doesn’t that seem like the textbook definition of self-abuse?
Why would a woman date someone who supports a man whose worldview is firmly rooted in hatred, homophobia, racism, religious bigotry, and misogyny? There’s no way to overstate how grossly objectionable support for Donald Trump is, given what Orange Jesus stands for. No reasonable person worthy of spending time with in any shape, manner, or form could support someone as transparently evil as Trump.
It’s that time again! The time when we are all supposed lament, for some reason, the fact that no one wants to date or marry Trump supporters. Kicking this round off, surprisingly, was The Washington Post editorial board, which published an op-ed this week worrying about how young liberal women won’t want to marry conservative men and how that might destroy civilization as we know it. Because more young women are identifying as liberal than ever, while young men are getting more conservative.
No, really:
Gen Z is still relatively young, and the Trump-era divisions between single men and women might yet reverse themselves. But there’s a good chance they won’t, particularly if Mr. Trump manages to inject the body politic with his distinct brand of existential dread during and after the 2024 elections. It is worth thinking both ahead of and beyond Mr. Trump. A cultural shift might be necessary — one that views politics as a part of people’s identity but far from the most important part. Americans’ ability to live together, quite literally, might depend on it.
True, but if women can’t find men they can live with, we certainly can’t expect them to settle or to lower their standards. No woman should be expected to spend their life with a man whose political ideology is abhorrent to them- especially when that ideology contains a large helping of misogyny.
While living in Houston, I dated several women whose politics were quite frankly repellent. They may have otherwise been good people, but one’s political views say a lot about how they view the world and regard and treat others in lesser circumstances. Kindness of spirit is essential to me, and people who are Trump supporters too often lack that kindness. I’m not big on selfishness, arrogance, and, yes, ignorance, which is overwhelmingly found in those who support Mango Mussolini.
Rachel Campos-Duffy, who is the worst, lamented that if these liberal women refuse to date Trump supporters that “they’re going to date — and maybe ultimately marry —a bunch of beta guys who will want to split the check, won’t open the door, won’t protect them.”
Why is it always door-opening? I feel like it really says something about conservatives that the one goddamned thing they’ve been able to come up with to explain what it is that conservative men offer to women is their door-opening abilities. That is what they bring to the table. Either that or they’re whining that they just don’t know if they’re supposed to open doors or not.
Doors are not that hard! You put your hand on the knob and twist and pull. Or you push. Whoever gets to the door first opens it for the other person, so long as they are physically able to do so. It is not that complicated. It’s a fucking door, people. Figure it out.
Imagine thinking that women should have to put up with someone who thinks they don’t deserve reproductive rights — or who perhaps even thinks that Tom Hanks and Hillary Clinton are running a Satanic child-sex-trafficking operation out of a pizza joint — for the sheer joy of not having to open a door sometimes. Again, it is a door.
It’s not about politics as much as it is about values. If you want to spend your life with someone who will treat you as an equal, will respect your right to reproductive healthcare, and view your relationship as a partnership, your odds of finding that with a Trump supporter aren’t high. Not that it isn’t possible, but it’s improbable.
While male Trump supporters can bitch and moan from here ‘til St. Patrick’s Day, the truth is that they’ve chosen to throw their lot in with perhaps the worst example of American 21st-century male humanity. Donald Trump is, not to put too fine a point on it, a repulsive pig, and those who’ve chosen to support him are rightly judged and found wanting.
Not surprisingly, though, Conservatives believe that Left-leaning women not wanting to date them is “authoritarianism.” Hmm…I wonder if these folks understand the definition of “projection?”
More correctly, I’d define Left-leaning women not wanting to date Trump supporters as “self-preservation.”
I think it’s a good thing Left-leaning women won’t date Trump-supporting men. The last thing America needs is the breeding of more hateful, racist, misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic religious bigots.
It's an amusing truth that comes up with regularity: Men who love Donald Trump struggle on the dating market. This is neither surprising nor regrettable. Supporting Trump is much like refusing to bathe, blowing your nose in your hands or farting loudly on purpose. It's a repugnant habit that makes you repulsive to normal people. The whole point of dating and marriage is to find happiness, not to spend the rest of one's days suffering in silence while the racist you live with cackles over Greg Gutfeld's latest hateful diatribe disguised as "comedy."
This should be common sense. Yet our sexist culture remains too enamored by stories of female self-sacrifice to accept that it's just fine if Trump voters never get laid. Even people who really should know better have taken to bullying liberal women for their refusal to date male Trump voters. "If attitudes don’t shift, a political dating mismatch will threaten marriage," declared a recent headline of a Washington Post column by the editorial board. To make it even grosser, the op-ed was published the day before Thanksgiving, as if to arm "concerned" relatives who planned to spend the holiday pestering single women at dinner over when they will get serious about finding a husband.
Why should Left-leaning women date across party lines, as the Washington Post op-ed seems to imply? Or, to put it more simply, why won’t Liberal women lower their standards and settle for Trump-supporting men out of some sick, twisted sense of patriotism? Why won’t more Trump-supporting men become decent, kind, caring, and compassionate?
We live in an era when some men are more concerned with their repugnant, repulsive political views than with how they present to other people. The “Fuck Your Feelings” mindset has excused a genuinely immature approach to interpersonal relationships that puts the onus upon women to explain the poor behavior of men.
Well, f**k that. It’s in no way incumbent upon Left-leaning women to lower their standards or to “settle” for less than they feel they deserve. And if they find Trump-supporting men repulsive, then so be it. Perhaps they can take solace in the ancient Greek comedy Lysistrata by Aristophanes.
Initially performed in Athens in 411 BC, Lysistrata is the comic account of one woman’s plan to end the Peloponnesian War by convincing women to deny sex to their husbands. The plan becomes increasingly complicated and eventually ignites a war (figuratively speaking) between the sexes, not unlike where we are now.
Whether we’re talking 411 BC or now, women are not responsible for explaining the poor behavior of men. And if they choose not to sleep with men who behave poorly, that’s on the men who don’t play well with others.
The op-ed presents as if this entreaty to date across party lines as if it's generalized advice being offered to both men and women, and both Republicans and Democrats. But of course, it's aimed primarily, if not exclusively, at Democratic-voting women. The polling data shows that most Republicans are already willing to date Democrats. (Which makes sense, since Democrats make more attractive partners.) It's mostly Democrats — and mostly women — who decline to date those from the other party.
Adding further insult to injury, the editorial board cites right-wing sociologist Brad Wilcox, who is set to publish yet another in a long list of books that treat compulsory heterosexual marriage as a panacea for all social ills. Wilcox has a shady history of ties to anti-gay advocacy. Disturbingly, he once argued that marriage prevents domestic violence. In reality, marriage just traps women in relationships with their abusers.
In trying to sell women on this "marry men who repulse you" plan, the editorial board unconvincingly argues that simply being married makes people happier than being single. But while it may be true that married people — even those in politically mixed marriages — report higher levels of happiness than single people, it doesn't follow that the wedding ring is the reason. Most Americans marry for love, after all. Being married to someone you wanted to marry is very different than what is being suggested here: lowering your standards just to get married.
Compulsory marriage? Seriously? This isn’t 17th-century England, y’all. No one, male or female, should be expected to lower their standards for “the greater good.” That idea died with the Third Reich, and deservedly so. “Fuck for the Fatherland” does no one any good.
In modern America, a woman has every right to expect- nay, demand- respect from a marriage partner. Women are no longer property, nor do men have any right to expect to have control over their bodies, their schedules…or anything else.
Unless, of course, you happen to live in Texas…but that’s another story.
Then again, if you like the idea of living with this kind of control freak…and I do mean freak:
Just a hunch, but I’m going to go out on a limb and hazard a guess that Monsieur Parcel is a Trump supporter…and if he isn’t single now, he very likely soon will be.
I fail to understand why some men seem to believe women are property that they may do with as they please, like livestock with breasts and a vagina. “Manage her well?” She’s not an employee; she’s a woman who deserves to be treated as a human being and an equal partner. If you can’t do that, you should go back to watching Monday Night Football in your underwear in a rundown one-bedroom apartment on the wrong side of the tracks. You don’t deserve someone in your life who’s beautiful, kind, and loving.
And that’s precisely the problem with Trump supporters. They’re so caught up in their world of ugliness and hatred that there’s no place for kindness and compassion. They don’t know how to treat and value a woman for what and who she is; too often, she’s a thing, a commodity to be kept in line.
Marrying a Trump voter isn't just a matter of minor political differences, or expecting someone to be exactly like yourself. For women, in particular, it's about being able to be safe and respected inside your own home, which is a very minimum standard all people deserve. Voting for Trump means backing a man who has been accused of sexual assault by two dozen women, and who a judge and jury deemed responsible for rape. It means backing the man who repeatedly brags that he got Roe v. Wade overturned. In addition, the MAGA media consumed by most Republicans is hardly neutral on the question of sexism. They are all for it, from the tired sexist jokes on Fox News to bizarre internet trends like "tradwives." For a woman, marrying a Trump supporter isn't about being with someone who has different views on tax rates. It's bringing someone into your home who ascribes to an ideology in which you are not fully human.
Most Left-leaning women don’t want to be trapped with someone with whom they can’t feel safe in their home. It’s not only about political differences; it’s about how a man values and treats a woman. It’s about respect and each party in a relationship treating the other as if they’re fully equal partners instead of one ascribing “to an ideology in which you are not fully human.”
I have a small sliver of sympathy for the frustration that drives this asinine hope that pity-marriages for Trump voters will save us from the MAGA threat. It's galling that nothing seems to wake up Trump voters from their fascist stupor. Reason doesn't change them. Evidence has no impact. Compassion or decency? We've tried appealing to their better angels for years, and all we get is "cry harder, libs." In the face of this MAGA unwillingness to suck less, there can be comfort in "Twilight"-style fantasies that the monster can be made into a man by a woman's loving touch. But it's simply not real.
Worse, it shifts responsibility for male misbehavior onto women. The blame for MAGA is subtly moved away from those who are perpetuating the problem, meaning Trump's predominantly male voters, onto the shoulders of Democratic women who have been doing everything right all along. It's reminiscent of the way women's hemlines are blamed for male violence or the way mothers are blamed for what their grown sons choose to do. It feels easier to blame women than to hold men accountable. But it's a distraction from the real source of the problem, and from thinking about real solutions.
To those on the Right who are complaining about Left-leaning women not wanting to date and/or marry Trump-supporting men, stop and think about what you’re asking of women. What you’re expecting from women is that they lower their standards and “settle” for a man who perhaps isn’t all that they’ve wanted for the good of the country.
“Fuck for the Fatherland?” Seriously? Grow up.
Instead of addressing the 800-lb. gorilla in this equation, you’re going to issue a tawdry appeal to patriotism? That’s just about the most pathetic thing imaginable. When you get down to it, this is really about sexism, which Republicans are all for. Sexism is a basic tenet of MAGA, though no MAGA-adjacent warrior will own up to that unavoidable, impossible-to-miss fact.
Of course, women's happiness has never been of particular concern to the Washington Post's editorial board or MAGA nation. All they really want is to get laid and make sure dinner’s on the table when they get home from work.
(All of my posts are now public. Any reader financial support will be considered pledges- support that’s greatly appreciated but not required to get to all of my work. I’ll trust my readers to determine if my work is worthy of their financial support and at what level. To those who do offer their support, thank you. It means more than you know.)
And now a word from our sponsor….
Where I live in So. IL, when the discussion turns to age appropriate women, the political orientation completely reverses. If I lived in a metro area with a strong leftward inclination to its politics, like Chicago or DMV, it would at least be mathematically possible to meet someone compatible. But as it is, I've taken the only honorable path and given up even trying.
You sound about as weary as I am with these mainstream think pieces on Trump supporters. One rich irony of this kind of focus, is that in an attempt to understand and administer to these people, they are inadvertently verifying the image of these people as immature and backwards. I mean, they feel that they need to speak up and advocate for them to liberal women in their behalf. But, you never see think pieces directed to MAGA folks about being more accepting of liberals, or anyone different than they are. The implication is that it would be useless, because MAGA's aren't sophisticated enough to respond to it. It's amazing, but not in a good way, and this WAPO ed is another example of it. And I can't even start with Paxon and the Texas Supreme Court with what they just did, it's monstrous.