It is an observed fact in poll after poll that women do not like far-right politics as much as men do.
Support for Reform and Restore in the UK is heavily male-led.
In the US, women are much less likely ot support Trump than men are.
Why? This headline from the New York Times today might explain why:
Pete Hegseth, the US Defence Secretary, who likes to style himself as the Secretary for War, has been deliberately blocking the promotion of women in general, and people from ethnic minorities in particular, in the US armed forces. Why? He wants, quite deliberately, to bias white men.
Unsurprisingly, women do not like being systematically subject to deliberate political discrimination.
Nor do people from ethnic minority groups.
Of course they do not support far-right politics as a result.
And that, it must be added, is why there is an absolute cap or ceiling on the levels of support it can ever command. Have PR, and these people need never be in government.
So, what is And Burnham going to do about it?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Too right, it’s toxic to women and our children.
Nothing more important than PR and effective regulation of political donations / funding etc.
Hegseth is tattooed with white nationalist symbols. Project 2025 is white nationalist. why are we surprised in a land that brooks having a female president? Reform is largely white male, run by white nationalists. Restore is run by a white fascist. Labour has never had a female leader, come to think of it. All a bit white patriarchy.