Is #MeToo Becoming #NotHim?

Empowerment. Strength. Empathy. Accountability. These are declared goals of the #MeToo movement that began in 2006, aiming to reveal the pervasive harm sexual harassment has perpetuated in our society and providing victims a community to connect with over their shared trauma. Awareness of this movement grew in 2015 following many accounts of sexual misconduct from a former film producer, Harvey Weinstein, encouraging other women who had experienced sexual trauma to come forward with their stories. As the years went on, statistics show that voters who identified with the Democratic party were the most supportive of the movement, whereas Republicans were far more hesitant to join the crusade. With 81% of Democrats standing by those who declared “#MeToo”, compared to only 54% of Republicans, it seemed that Democrats were firmly established as the party to defend victims of sexual abuse. Their stance was put to the test in late March of this year, when former Joe Biden staffer, Tara Reade, accused her employer of serious sexual misconduct that happened in 1993. Although the allegation was made at a crucial moment in Biden’s career––during his current 2020 bid for President––major news outlets withheld coverage on the story for two weeks. Around the end of April, fewer than ten 15-second clips on the accusation had been displayed by CNN, whereas Fox News showed more than 60. A poll conducted in May found that while 78% of Republicans believed the Tara Reade assault allegation, only 34% of Democrats held the same sentiment. So why the shift in partisan support? How did the party that boldly supported the #MeToo movement seem so ready to discount Tara Reade’s accusation?

While there are many plausible reasons for this shift in support, including the questionable validity of the claim, another explanation can be found by turning to political scientists Thomas Leeper and Rune Slothuus in their article Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Public Opinion Formation. They present a concept called motivated reasoning, referring to the idea that decisions are motivated by desired end goals and existing predispositions. Oftentimes in the world of political science, this term is used to describe the way voters’ opinions are influenced by their partisanship. Directionally motivated reasoning is a subset of this larger concept in which, “citizens are motivated by a ‘directional’ goal to reach a certain desired conclusion, namely forming an opinion in a particular direction that is consistent with their party identification.” Oftentimes these goals are established even if they are contrary to an individual’s innate desires and beliefs. Because party identification can hold an emotional place in a voters’ heart, party messages heavily affect their reasoning, and individuals with contrary beliefs, “must reason their way from that position of dissonance to support for the party’s stance.” For instance, although somebody may be willing to follow public health and safety measures, if the party’s general message is that mask-wearing is ineffective, that same individual may convince themselves to change their own beliefs and follow the party line. Leeper and Slothuus argue that voters who use motivated reasoning, especially when directionally motivated, can be easily swayed from their original beliefs by party messages and partisan goals. This concept has wide application in understanding partisan human behavior, with strong implications for the response of the Democratic party to Tara Reade.

That the modern Democratic party, which claims to stalwartly support the voices of the unheard, was slow to heed Tara Reade’s accusations can be puzzling at first. By looking at the situation through the lens of motivated reasoning, their reaction becomes clearer. By mid-March Joe Biden was taking the lead in the Democratic primary elections, which encouraged prominent Democrats to begin throwing their support behind the former vice-president. It seemed apparent that he was their best chance at beating presidential incumbent, Donald Trump. When the Tara Reade accusation arose, Democrats had to consider their options: urge Joe Biden to drop out of the race and potentially lose the election, or continue facilitating his campaign regardless of the allegation. Despite Democrats’ vocal support of sexual assault victims, most liberal news stations and politicians chose the latter. Nancy Pelosi, speaking on the accusation in late April, stated that while she has “complete respect for the whole #MeToo movement, there is also due process and the fact that Joe Biden is Joe Biden.” Such statements from prominent Democrats, and light coverage in the liberal media, contributed to general public perception and especially impacted the average Democratic voter. Despite the majority of Democrats supporting the #MeToo movement, less than half of Democrats believed Reade’s accusation, potentially because it was put against the most popular Democratic challenger. 

While the values of supporting, advocating for, and listening to women are important for Democrats, directionally motivated reasoning has compelled them to look beyond the Reade allegation and work towards their goal of ousting Donald Trump from power. In short, motivated reasoning has turned #MeToo into #NotHim.