America clearly is not ready for a female president: why?

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to highlight the ways gender influenced the 2016 presidential election, as well as ways in which the USA might progress to become a more gender-egalitarian nation. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on a combination of voter data, psychological theories - including sexism, social role theory, stereotype content model, group status threat, and system justification theory - and opinions, this paper explores the factors that drove the 2016 presidential election outcome. Findings This paper asserts that while there were reasons other than gender that people voted the way they did in the 2016 presidential election, these reasons were ancillary to the role that gender bias and stereotypes played. It concludes with a call to action, arguing that: more women need to enter into politics, each of us must recognize our own and make others aware of their overt sexism and subtle biases, the public must acknowledge and change the often double standards that exist for women but not men, and we must realize that a win for women is also often a win for men. Originality/value The value lies in introducing a social psychological lens focused on gender to the 2016 presidential election. This paper combines data, theory, and broader opinions to present a compelling perspective on the election in a way that, to our knowledge, has not been done before.