Harry Geels: Young women more progressive, men more conservative
This column was originally written in Dutch. This is an English translation.
By Harry Geels
The Financial Times recently published an analysis of a new global gender divide in politics: young women are becoming more progressive, while young men are becoming more conservative. What explains this striking divergence? How does it translate into investor behaviour? And what can we do about it?
A recent analysis by John Burn-Murdoch sparked much debate. He showed that in many countries, from the United States to South Korea, young women are becoming more progressive and young men more conservative. The debate is particularly topical given all the commotion surrounding the murders of Lisa in the Netherlands and Charlie Kirk in the US. How did this political divide come about? Another important question is whether this will lead to problems and, if so, how we should solve them.
Widening ideology gap
Figure 1 shows the percentage of “liberals” minus the percentage of conservatives aged 18 to 29 in various countries. It is clear that young women (red line) are becoming more progressive, while young men (blue line) are becoming more conservative. For clarity's sake, the term “liberal” has multiple meanings in English. In this context, it should be understood as progressive (more socialist). In South Korea in particular, young men are becoming noticeably more conservative at a rapid pace.
Figure 1
Five factors stand out
An interpretation of the FT article points to five possible causes of the “Gen Z gender gap”.
- Education: women are entering higher education en masse. Research shows that higher education correlates strongly with progressive views.
- Economic experience: women are more likely to depend on policies around care, affordable childcare and equal pay; themes that draw them towards the social democratic corner.
- Cultural values: younger women are more likely to embrace diversity and inclusivity, while young men are more likely to identify with traditional role models.
- Digital bubbles: online platforms offer women progressive networks, while men are more likely to follow conservative or anti-feminist influencers.
- Backlash dynamics: the social “rise” of women makes some men feel threatened, leading to a reflexive return to conservative beliefs.
The Netherlands
This dynamic is not just an Anglo-American curiosity. In the Netherlands, too, we are seeing social discussions harden along gender lines. The debate on femicide clearly illustrates this: there are increasing calls for violence against women to be seen not as an incident, but as a structural social problem. Women do not always experience society as a safe place and expect men to be more conscious of their behaviour.
At the same time, some men feel collectively addressed or accused. The refrain “not all men” is quickly heard, and the conversation becomes entangled in mutual recriminations. While women seek a safe conversation about vulnerability and protection, men experience this as a loss of individual justice and freedom of expression. The result: a growing, and therefore problematic, gap between generations of men and women.
Social media
We also see this division in everyday contexts such as LinkedIn. More than 90% of the responses to my own posts come from men (and, unfortunately, too few reflections from women). The divergence of opinion is therefore broader: men mainly engage with other men, women with women. According to the World Bank Development Economics, women often view online debate as a competitive arena, with higher risks to their reputation or safety, making them less likely to respond.
Different investment behaviour?
We see the same dynamics of separate networks and risk perceptions in the financial markets. Young men who become more conservative or status-oriented are more likely to opt for riskier, short-term or “system-challenging” investments such as cryptos, Tesla or Palantir. Network effects play a role: conservative men mainly follow other men who are seen as successful, including prominent entrepreneurs and finfluencers.
Women, who more often operate in progressive and supportive networks, tend to opt for diversified, long-term or sustainability-focused portfolios. A study by UBS (2025) shows that 75% of women take sustainability into account when investing, compared to 50% of men (the differences are even greater among young people). In this way, social and political behaviour is also reflected in the way different groups gather information and allocate capital.
A start towards a solution
Can we solve gender divergence? Polarisation cannot be countered with statistics or hashtags alone. An approach is needed that does justice to both the real fears and experiences of women and the need for men not to be collectively condemned. Perhaps a controversial position (here we go): I think we need more male role models in education, teachers or mentors who offer boys and men a healthier alternative than Charlie Kirk and Andrew Tate.
In education and within families, popular culture, such as certain series, for example Netflix's Adolescence, should be discussed safely to help both boys and girls reflect. On social media, smaller groups, private conversations, open questions, less harsh statements and algorithms that are less gender- and bubble-reinforcing can narrow the gap. Because only when men and women meet again instead of facing each other can the gap truly be closed.
This article contains the personal opinion of Harry Geels