Surveys show a widening gender ideological gap in recent years. Why?
Written by Evelynn Leung from Academy of Saint Elizabeth in Morristown NJ
Recent studies from developed countries provide consistent evidence of an expanding ideological gap between young men and women. Fernandez-Torres et al. (2025), Nennstiel and Hudde (2025), Chowdhury (2026), and Milosav et al. (2026), for example, observe that young women are increasingly aligned with progressive political values, while men tend to remain ideologically constant or move rightward. Evidence points to a growing gender-ideological gap across Europe, North America, and beyond, suggesting a widespread structural transformation rather than a localized peculiarity (Nennstiel & Hudde, 2025). This paper contends that the widening gender ideological gap results from the convergence of economic, educational, and cultural shifts and the growing prominence of gender identity, which have pushed women toward more liberal political attitudes.
Psychological and Identity-Based Mechanisms
Research in political psychology shows that ideologies are shaped by several factors, including policy preferences, material interests, and individuals' internal psychological structures, particularly their value orientations and sense of social identity (Lonnqvist, 2022). According to Lesschaeve et al. (2024), women are more likely to display cooperative, collective, and welfare-oriented values, while men are more likely to display individualistic, competitive, and assertive values. Although these values cannot explain women's left turn in recent years, they may have gained political significance, since educational attainment, financial autonomy, and empowerment created conditions that made it possible to express and politicise this value configuration more fully. These differences matter, particularly in shaping attitudes toward welfare provision and the role of the state.
The salience of gender as a political identity further heightens the correspondence between gender and political ideology. Hoskins and Carrasco (2024) demonstrate that gender inequality is evident in adolescence and continues throughout life, shaping long-term attitudes and behaviors. This may also help explain why women are increasingly responsive to issues of representation, social justice, and rights. Instead of generating new or different types of political preferences, increasing educational attainment, economic independence, and visibility in the polity have chronicled women's longstanding experiences of gender subordination and brought these experiences into sharper political relief. As women gain greater access to higher education, the workplace, and the public sphere, they encounter the inequalities that inhibit their privilege and prosperity more frequently and intensely. In this way, their experiences of gender disparity can prompt them to understand inequality as a social condition rather than a problem of individual deficiency. This, in turn, makes them more amenable to embracing egalitarian, representation-focused, and institutional reformist ideologies.
The widening gender ideological gap may also indicate different responses to social change, as changes in economic, cultural, and gender relations alter how status, identity, and placement are understood. For example, masculine ideology and behavior (characterized by self-reliance, competitiveness, and assertiveness, among others) predict young men's responses to social structures and change (Baskin et al., 2026). This likely partially explains why some men are shifting toward more conservative orientations to uphold social certainties and identity continuity. Women, by contrast, may be receptive to progressive ideologies that affirm intent to redress inequalities. Analysis of ideological behaviors during periods of crisis showed that uncertainty increased both attachment to existing ideology and cross-gender political polarisation (Lesschaeve et al., 2024). Ultimately, psychological processes of identity and insecurity operate alongside structural change.
Economic and Political Restructuring and Diverging Interests
The increasingly pronounced gender-ideological divide can be conceptualized as arising from psychological consequences of a series of structural and economic changes. Structural changes, such as shifting labor markets, replacing manufacturing economies with knowledge-based ones, and expanding digital spheres, can destabilize individuals' self-conceptions (Grewinski & Kawa, 2024). Factors such as identity threat induced by these destabilizing forces are likely to lead to a quest for cognitive certainty, increased vulnerability to motivated reasoning, and greater reliance on identity-motivated information processing (Block & Schmader, 2025). These dynamics could deepen the gender-ideology split as men and women draw on diverse identity frames to make sense of social change.
Economic reorganization has transformed objective conditions and gendered structures of work, leading to a perceived threat to the status of men that elicits motivated reasoning to maintain status beliefs. Male-dominated industrial jobs that once provided the foundation for objective stability are vanishing, replaced by service and knowledge-based jobs. For women, this has meant more opportunities in what Musa Al Gharbi calls "symbolic capitalist" professions, including higher education institutions and the professional sphere. Among men, women's rising socioeconomic level conditions lead to feelings of status threat, which is a subjective decrease in an individual's or group's status compared to an out-group, associated with unstable self-conceptions and discomfort (Thaler, 2021). These conditions activate motivated reasoning, leading to the falsification and distortion of information to maintain a coherent, positive self-concept. Motivated reasoning studies show that one's self-perceived level of self-efficacy is higher when they use motivated reasoning to defend their beliefs (Thaler, 2021). According to Boyer et al. (2022), men (especially those whose positions of power are threatened) engage in this identity-protective motivated reasoning more intensely. The practice allows them to consolidate their beliefs with the prevailing status order. This same condition of economic change also stimulates a need for cognitive closure – a motivational bias toward certainty, clarity, and order. Recent empirical evidence shows that intolerance for uncertainty (IU), which is stronger during times of societal instability, positively predicts greater adherence to both right-leaning and hierarchical ideologies (Van Baar et al., 2021). Conservative ideologies are then seen as functioning as coping mechanisms, providing certainty in unstable conditions which could threaten an individual's social and personal self. Thus, the gender ideological gap is understood in terms of different material interests and psychological processes applied toward the same structural change.
Educational Expansion and Value Formation
Educational differences between genders also play a role in their respective political socialization and value formation. Extensive empirical literature points to education's positive role in promoting liberal and egalitarian values by increasing individuals' awareness and understanding of diverse viewpoints. Advancements in women's education correlate with increased political participation and representation, thus sustaining a progressive orientation among women (Bellani & Hidalgo-Hidalgo, 2025). Meanwhile, more young men are failing to invest in formal education because of psychological, cultural, and biological factors (Deckha, 2021; Stoet & Geary, 2020). This failure to invest in schooling limits exposure to progressive values and increases susceptibility to conventional or conservative views. A study on youth political attitudes finds that ideological divides are associated with educational differences, with higher levels of education tending to align individuals with progressive positions substantially (Nennstiel & Hudde, 2025). The gender gap in education contributes to more liberal-leaning political attitudes by linking higher education to more liberal attitudes and lower investment in education to more conservative attitudes.
Cultural Change and Gender Norm Conflict
Contemporary cultural changes are characterized by feminist movements (which harbor a co-constitutive relationship with culture), the increased recognition and value of diverse experiences and identities, and the obliteration of binary-based gender roles based on new, more fluid norms. Drawing on social identity theory, individual identities become more important when the associated social group appears threatened. Recent research has established that political ideology is predicted by how individuals interpret diversity ideologies as either a threat or an empowerment opportunity (Martin, 2023). These changes enhance the salience of gender, thereby enabling women's increasing identification with egalitarianism – not as a defensive cognitive response to group threat, but rather due to a new appreciation of self, affirmation of roles, personal experience of discrimination, and the potential for collective action.
For men, these gender shifts represent not only economic but also social group threat, which they then respond to through identity-protective motivation and defensive integration, defined as the desire to maintain an affirmed sense of social standing. Empirical evidence shows that gender ideologies are driven by group status, with members of high-status groups exhibiting more identity-protective motivation when faced with relevant threats (Boyer et al., 2022). More studies have shown evidence for the role of masculinity ideology in men's resistance to women's progress and in more conservative political ideologies (Baskin et al., 2026). This implies that the political ideological gap is not a matter of ideology itself, but of a cognitive process behind the belief when the relevant identity is threatened.
Digital Media and Polarized Information Environments
Political belief formation in a digital environment primarily involves identity-protective cognitions, whereby people choose identities that sustain a desired, consistent positive self-presentation. This bias becomes particularly potent in a high-information world where an overload of political news has a polarizing, rather than moderating, effect on individuals (Ludwig & Sommer, 2024). These dynamics are amplified in the digital domain by algorithms that deliver personally tailored news feeds, effectively confirming individuals' pre-existing beliefs and fostering a world of ideological echo chambers and silos.
Highly emotional, identity-confirming information is more likely to circulate in this social context, reinforcing pre-existing beliefs. Ambiguities in the news are processed in accordance with individuals' pre-existing beliefs when the relevant identity is activated (Ludwig & Sommer, 2024). For example, for women, prioritized conversations are, among others, the #MeToo movement, women's reproductive rights, inequality (e.g., pay equity, glass ceiling), gender-based violence, and other forms of gendered violence (Fairbairn, 2020). Assisted by algorithms, feeds tend to sort content to strongly emphasize conversations around mental health, body positivity, and critiques of gender expectations, while also promoting user-generated content such as self-reflection and growth.
Content discussing toxic masculinity in online environments appears to be heavily clustered in several distinct and overlapping groupings. For example, there are clusters around hyper-masculinity/ hyper-dominance norms that define masculinity in terms of control of others, emotional denial, and sexual authority, with feminization and vulnerability defined as weakness. Similarly, misogynistic dating subcultures-such as pickup artist (PUA) communities and incel spaces-often construct gender relations as competitive or zero-sum, dehumanize women by portraying them as the antagonists of men's social and sexual success, and refer to women as "fish," which are the objects that men "catch" (Ging, 2017). Repeating emotionally evocative content that resonates with one's social identity strengthens interpretive frames that shape opinions and bolster identity-consistent belief systems. As a result, two fundamentally separate epistemological universes develop between genders, and neither will challenge the other's claims.
Counter-Arguments: Biological and Evolutionary Approaches
It is argued that the gender ideological gap reflects fundamental differences between women and men derived from human evolution and biology, especially differing risk preferences, competitiveness, and caregiving orientations. This argument can be supported by evidence demonstrating persisting gender differences in attitudes and behavioral predispositions. Extensive cross-national research reveals that the magnitude and even the direction of the gender ideological gap vary considerably across countries and contexts, suggesting that institutions, education, and politics play a vital role. For example, evidence shows that a larger gap is more strongly associated with patterns of political participation, gendered experiences of representation, and a specific political environment than with any biological variation (Mechkova et al., 2022). Longitudinal research further suggests that education, career choices, and other life-course decisions and transitions affect gender ideologies (Wilhelm, 2025). So, while biological differences might account for slight background differences, they do not explicitly explain the growing divergence between men's and women's ideological beliefs.
Conclusion
The growing gender ideological gap is best understood as the result of structural changes in economic circumstances, education, culture, and communication, rather than significant biological differences between men and women. A balanced higher education system that considers the social and cultural needs of young men might help reduce the expanding gender ideological gap. Non-conservative men provide a window through which the ideological divide can be analyzed and mitigated. Importantly, the gender ideological gap is not a global certainty and can be reduced through targeted policies that promote greater fairness, discourse, and equality.
References
Baskin, H. M., Bain, C. M., & Cavazos, J. T. (2026). Reframing the gender gap: Masculine ideology as a predictor of academic behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 17, 1805150. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1805150
Bellani, L., & Hidalgo-Hidalgo, M. (2025). Bridging the gender gap: Women's education and political representation. Economics of Education Review, 104.
Block, K., & Schmader, T. (2025). Me, myself, and my stereotypes: does retraining gender stereotypes change men's self-concept? Self and Identity, 24(4), 326–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2025.2477003
Boyer, M. M., Aaldering, L., & Lecheler, S. (2022). Motivated reasoning in identity politics: Group status as a moderator of political motivations. Political Studies, 70(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321720964667
Chowdhury, I. S. (2026). Explaining the modern gender-generation gap in Australian politics. Australian Journal of Political Science, 60(4), 369–392.
Deckha, N. (2021). Passion in a climate of austerity: Young men's perceptions of education and career success in a polarized economy. Journal of Men's Studies, 29(1), 50–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/1060826520921194
Fairbairn, J. (2020). Before #MeToo: Violence against women social media work, bystander intervention, and social change. Societies, 10(3), 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10030051
Fernández-Torres, A. B., Martí-Ripoll, M., & Gallifa, J. (2025). Gender equality and sustainable societies: The role of identity salience, ideological beliefs, and support for feminism. Social Sciences, 14(9), 552. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14090552
Ging, D. (2017). Alphas, betas, and incels: Theorizing the masculinities of the manosphere. Men and Masculinities, 22(4), 638–657. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X17706401
Grewinski, M., & Kawa, M. (2024). The impact of technology on changes in labor markets and competences. In Environment. Technology. Resources: Proceedings of the 15th International Scientific and Practical Conference, 2, pp. 371–379.
Hoskins, B., & Carrasco, D. (2024). Understanding gender inequality in political self-efficacy in
early adolescents: Different measures, different gender gaps. Journal of Social
Inclusion, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/14789299241264970
Lesschaeve, C., Glaurdić, J., D’Ambrosio, C., & Vögele, C. (2024). Gender roles and political ideology in the pandemic: Experimental evidence from Western Europe. Frontiers in Political Science, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2023.1325138
Lonnqvist, J.E. (2022). The gender gap in political psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1072494. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1072494
Ludwig, J., & Sommer, J. (2024). Mindsets and politically motivated reasoning about fake news. Motivation and Emotion, 48, 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-024-100670
Martin, A. E. (2023). The divergent effects of diversity ideologies for race and gender r relations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 175, 104226.
Mechkova, V., Dahlum, S., & Sanhueza Petrarca, C. (2022). Women's political
representation,good governance, and human development. Governance, 37, 19–38.
Milosav, D., Dickson, Z., Hobolt, S. B., Kluver, H., Kuhn, T., & Rodon, T. (2026). The youth
gender gap in support for the far right. Journal of European Public Policy, 33(2), 444–
Nennstiel, R., & Hudde, A. (2025). Is there a growing gender divide among young adults in regard to ideological left–right self-placement? Evidence from 32 European countries. European Sociological Review, 41(6), 862–883. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcaf021
Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2020). Gender differences in the pathways to higher education.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,
117(25), 14073–14076. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2002861117
Thaler, M. (2021). Gender differences in motivated reasoning. Journal of Economic
Behavior& Organization, 191, 501–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.09.016
Van Baar, J. M., Halpern, D. J., & FeldmanHall, O. (2021). Intolerance of uncertainty
modulates brain-to-brain synchrony during politically polarized perception.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,
118(20).
Wilhelm, J. (2025). Impressionable years: How life course transitions shape gender
ideologies across adolescence and young adulthood. Advances in Life Course
Research, 66, 100705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2025.100705
Comments