I took a gulp of beer — a big one. The bar we’d found in Victoria was pretty empty, which made my next move even more daunting. “Yes, let’s talk about politics,” she’d said. “Values are very important to me.” Five minutes later, having expressed my belief in Machiavellian republicanism, and that Britain’s immigration policy in the 21st century left some things to be desired, I was out of the woods.
I might have survived, but is Gen Z destined to be divided over politics?
Following an article in the New Statesman, the internet is abuzz with the topic of “angry young women”. Over brunches, dinners, and drinks, I’ve been face-to-face with many. The girl above wasn’t angry at all; she desired sensible, policy-driven solutions, like any kind-hearted person should, but the politicisation of young women is a reality. As polling in the magazine shows, Gen Z women are by far the most left-wing demographic in the country. Even the “privileged” — my type, coincidentally — want radical change.
Lawyers, consultants, strategists: all the women I see are voting Green. When I asked one why she would do something which went directly against her economic interest, she said, “I don’t know what I would do with the money anyway.” When I asked if I could quote her, she challenged me and responded, “it’s in my self-interest, as i understand it, to live somewhere that prioritises distributive justice.” The New Statesman revealed a huge pessimism about capitalism among young women. In my experience, even those who are winning the game want to overthrow it.
Radicalised young women on the political left have been compared to the manosphere-orbiting young men supposedly on the political right. Although it should be remembered that the Greens lead among Gen Z men too, there is a difference between the revolutionary urges of Britain’s young people. The crisis of masculinity is far easier to solve. Young men’s worries can be solved by material improvements — cash money, as they say. But young women’s problems are far less tangible.
This is clear in the dreaded domain of dating. Gen Z women refusing to date conservative men has been picked up in columns and polling for a while. Members of Leeds University Feminist Society told the New Statesman’s Emily Lawson that they wouldn’t even be friends with one. Although this may seem a tempting outgrowth of the supposedly partisan Gen Z, in reality it is much harder to find.
When dating online, you always need another excuse not to see someone. There are a lot of bad eggs and, for women, “no” is the default option. If you are meeting a young person for whom being “conservative” is front and centre in their life, then they are part of a very statistically select bunch. We forget left-wing parties have significant leads among young men, although not at the margins we see in young women. When young women say they won’t date an out-and-out conservative, not only is the hypothetical unlikely, they — like “Anna”, who spoke to the New Statesman — end up dating someone who went to private school. Once you prove you are normal and can conduct yourself in public without being a “neo-fascist”, you shouldn’t find much trouble. In typical Gen Z fashion, it is vibes or nothing.
Nor should girls really be blamed. Modern dating isn’t particularly nice. Women receive endless attention from men they aren’t interested in, and then are hurt by those they actually like. This is even truer for professionally successful young women, as their pool of male peers is much smaller. Despite the general aversion to men and specific rejection of male conservatives found in polling, it is far less black and white when encountered in person.
It is easy to go looking for incels or, in this case, the most radical women in Gen Z, but those in the middle I encounter every day are far more interesting. Most I get on with. Despite still holding 80 per cent of the opinions ascribed to “angry young women” on individual issues, they are far more reasonable than the caricatures of them on X.
Discussions are not debates over argument but delicate intellectual dances between two incongruent worlds
When we have ended up arguing about politics, normally they are far more willing to compromise than polling would suggest. On issues such as immigration, fervent Green supporters will understand the huge numbers of the Boriswave were at least far from ideal. When you are in a relationship with someone, you have the trust to rationally explain your thoughts to them and the evidence they are grounded in. Beyond the confines of bedrooms or empty shared kitchens, the world is a different place. I and whoever I’m with will have effectively separate information systems. As such, discussions are not debates over argument but delicate intellectual dances between two incongruent worlds.
I might be able to bridge a gap on one issue in a conversation, but there is a mythology firmly based around “being kind” which feeds through everything. On divisive issues like immigration, you have to justify that you are not innately evil. This might be sustainable on a personal level, but for political leaders it is impossible. “Angry young women” are here to stay; at least I’ve got used to them.
