Here is who is responsible for Donald Trump: The people who voted for him. The many, many Americans who saw a man make fun of a disabled reporter on national television and still stepped inside a voting booth on November 8th and said, “I’m voting for that guy. He seems fine.”



You can say whatever you wish about those people. You can say their choice was motivated by understandable factors. You can say they are abject racists. You can say they were economically threatened. You can say they are misogynists. You can certainly dispute the reasons that they made the choice they did. That said—their choice, and theirs alone—is the reason we have Trump.

Trump’s rise is not due to black people requesting that the police force sworn to protect them not shoot them.

It is not because gay people wanted some cake at their wedding.

It is not even because trans people might be gaining the tiniest, most insufficient crumb of acceptance from mainstream society.

Trump’s rise may very well have to do with the fact that some people are terrified of a changing world. It may have to do with the fact that minorities wanting to be treated the way white men have always been treated is very threatening to those people.

"Minorities themselves are no more responsible for Trump’s presidency than black people are to blame for the Civil War because they disliked being slaves."

However, the minorities themselves are no more responsible for Trump’s presidency than black people are to blame for the Civil War because they disliked being slaves.

Or, as Bojack Horseman joked, the Jews are to blame for WWII because they “peeved off Hitler so bad.”

I am also fairly certain that women who did not want to date conservative men are not responsible for Trump, because I doubt they voted for him.

This seems to be lost on the party of personal responsibility. This Tuesday, The Federalist ran an article entitled “Your Refusal To Date Conservatives Is One Reason We Have Trump." As if by denying conservative men access to our liberal agendas we peeved them off so bad that they had no choice but to vote for Trump.

The author’s piece is frankly, a little all over the place. The author remarks that OKCupid has introduced a feature that allows users to indicate their support for Planned Parenthood. This feature was introduced Wednesday, so it cannot have anything to do with Trump’s rise. Oh, well. Cool fact, anyway, I guess.

"As if by denying conservative men access to our liberal agendas we peeved them off so bad that they had no choice but to vote for Trump."

He then relates this to the concept of Assortative Mating. The concept states that, especially since the 1960s, people have gravitated towards partners who are similar to themselves in background, wealth, values and cognitive ability.

Why assortative mating has increased since the '60s is not a mystery. It’s because of women’s rights. Or, as the Economist states in an article on the topic, “Male doctors in the 1960s married nurses because there were few female doctors. Now there are plenty.”

There are some downsides to this trend—for instance, it does increase income inequality as it pertains to households (the two doctors who marry each other will make far more as a household than the doctor of yesteryear who marries a nurse.) I’m even willing to agree with the author that it increases the sense of tribalism because it means we form households and become friends with other couples that share similar viewpoints and reinforce our own ways of looking at the world.

But if this is considered a real problem, then you’d have to look at how to change it. I can pretty much assure you that women are not going to happily revert to the state we occupied pre-1960s.

And screaming, “you must mate with me or I will do something you think is horrible” as the title of this piece suggests is not an effective dating strategy. It is more just an apparent strategy that will make people think you are a monster, whether you are Elliot Rodgers or a man who feels you should use the privilege of your vote to punish women.

I do sympathize with anyone, male or female, who is alone and is frustrated because they do not have a partner. The world is a scary, difficult place, and having someone to share your sorrows and joys with is a great boon. And that’s without the social pressure demanding that you partner up.

"Women have been told that we are expected to attract a mate since the beginning of time."

Speaking of that pressure, women have been told that we are expected to attract a mate since the beginning of time. Even with our new opportunities, that pressure still exists.

Sometimes, men have not wanted to date us or commit to us. That happens quite often, really. Do you know how women respond to this?

By learning how to cook a really good chicken dinner.

Seriously. There’s an article about how men will propose to you if you cook a special kind of chicken.

There are a million articles that teach women how to be the ultimate partner for a man. Here is one that suggests you be vulnerable while also never gaining weight, which runs next to a post for breast enhancement exercises you can do every day. These articles on how you can, in theory, be more appealing to a man are not hard to find. Books like were more or less founded on that promise



Does throwing yourself into the cult of self improvement to attract a mate seem time consuming and sort of laughable? Yes. It does. But at least the woman who chooses that path now knows how to make a nice chicken dinner. That’s a cool skill. And, look! She did not either shoot a bunch of men—in the manner of Elliot Rogers when women would not date him—or elect a fascist—as this article seems to imply men will.

She just went out and learned a skill that will maybe, possibly, make people more inclined to think she’s a good mate. Like a sane human being who understands that you can’t bully other people into liking you.

"When men won’t date women, women assume the problem is with them. When women won’t date men, men also assume the problem is with women."

That’s because when men won’t date women, women assume the problem is with them. When women won’t date men, men also assume the problem is with women.

That’s not generally the case.

So guys, maybe, just maybe, if you’re frustrated by the fact that women aren’t dating you, rather than writing a revenge piece blaming them for our current political climate, consider some skills you could cultivate that would improve a woman’s life. What would make people see you as a more desirable mate? You could cook. Or enhance your abs. Or do anything rather than just standing there screaming, “you are obligated to date me or I will make you miserable.”

Because the main person that approach will make miserable, is you.

Jennifer Wright Jennifer Wright is BAZAAR.com's Political Editor at Large.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io