A global gender divide within Generation Z?

Given that the world, and Europe in particular, currently finds itself in ever-increasing turmoil, an emerging gender divide is not proving to be beneficial but rather dangerous. In January, 2024, the Financial Times announced the surfacing of a “new global gender divide” (Burn-Murdoch, 2024). According to their data, young women aged 18 to 29 are becoming increasingly progressive while men in their age range grow more conservative, resulting in an undeniably widening ideological divide. While the article effectively draws attention to a real and pressing development, its core argument was quickly embraced by public discourse as an unquestionable truth. But is Generation Z truly experiencing increased polarisation along gender lines?

Palumba’s data proposes a more nuanced perspective, hence enriching the simplistic discourse. Its data was collected during Palumba’s inaugural mission at the European Parliament elections of 2024 where Palumba emerged as the first pan-European voting advice application specifically targeted at the youth. Respondents were able to swipe left or right on a statement depending on whether they would agree with it or not. They could also provide more nuance by answering “slightly” (dis-)agree or choosing to be indifferent. After completion, the participants received a political party match based on their answers to aid their decision of who to vote for. Over the course of the mission, the app reached over 170.000 young Europeans from 27 member states. To try it for yourself, please click here. 

An analysis of Palumba’s data, illustrated below by the most relevant graphs, suggests an identifiable gender divide among users. Women tend to express more progressive views and men more conservative ones, mirroring the Financial Times Report of 2024 (Burn-Murdoch, 2024). However, this polarisation has to be considered with more nuance – the extent of division and agreement varies depending on the issue at hand. This variation aligns with findings from the 2023 Allianz Foundation Study which put forward that Gen Z tends to shy away from being either left- or right-leaning but prefers to focus on certain issues. In the case of Palumba, the most pronounced gender disparities emerge in debates surrounding climate change and LGBTQIA+ rights, as seen in the graphs below.

Fig. 1: Graphs visualising the average response for each age and gender pair for the statements asked on the Palumba App during the European Elections 2024 mission. Due to a lack of data, responses with the label “non-binary” and “prefer not to answer” are not displayed.

Female and male respondents were divided in their stance on whether “economic growth is more important than climate action”. 80% of women disagreed with the statement, compared to only 63,4% of men. On the topic of LGBTQIA+, Gen Z women had in general a much more positive stance towards the queer community. As such, 76,8% of Palumba’s young female respondents agreed with the statement that “the EU should confront member states that do not respect LGBTQIA+ rights” while men tended to respond on average more neutral (only 60% of men agree). Similarly, more women than men agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “trans rights are human rights”. Men, by contrast, tended to adopt a more neutral stance.

The question arises why a divide between the genders arises specifically with these two topics – climate change and LGBTQIA+ rights. Starting with the theme of climate change, the gender divide can be partly explained by the fact that women are disproportionately affected by climate change. Intersectionality in terms of class, race and sexuality only furthers this problem. Gender imbalance stems from the reality that women often tend to bear the burden of household responsibilities as they have to organise the food, water and fuel for the family (D’Cunha, 2023). Women already face a lack of or unequal access to resources and climate change only works as a “threat multiplier” (D’Cunha, 2023). Moreover, according to the Edelman Trust Barometer in 2019, women tend to have less trust in institutions and businesses. Dr. Rachel Howell, lecturer of Sustainable Development at the University of Edinburgh, explained in an interview with the British newspaper The Guardian, that this lack of trust translates into a belief that the current system does not act in the interests of the people, particularly women (Hunt, 2022). This discrepancy can also be seen in Pearse’s (2017) analysis, which shows that agency in climate negotiations and climate-development projects tends to be heavily skewed and male-dominated, leaving them gender-blind and reinforcing gender vulnerabilities. As a consequence, women are more inclined to take action themselves and thus feel more strongly about climate protection. Palumba’s data suggests this too, as women on average tended to consider climate change more as a problem. 

On LGBTQIA+ rights, the observed gender divide may be rooted in societal sexism and the broader patriarchal structure. Socially constructed notions of femininity and masculinity shape how individuals relate to non-heteronormative identities, making it more or less accessible for different genders to engage with alternatives to heterosexuality. Stuck in an already oppressive system, irrespective of their actions, women may encounter fewer social barriers when exploring queer ideas of sexuality, love and relationships. Furthermore, given their lived experiences of oppression, women may have the ability or be trained to show more empathy for other oppressed groups. Contrastingly, men are frequently faced with rigid and (most times) toxic conceptions of masculinity which hinder them to explore and tolerate aberrations from the socially accepted norm of sexuality (Kimmel, 1994). 

As Fig. 1 shows, a gender divide clearly exists on the issues of climate change and support for LGTBQIA+ rights. However, Fig. 2 below also shows that, for other topics, men and women share broadly similar views on average. This observation underscores the formerly mentioned tendency of Gen Z to link their political alignments with specific topics instead of a general direction. Within Palumba’s data, Gen Z aligns on the topics of lowering the voting age and the accession of new EU member states. 

Fig. 2: Graphs visualising the average response for each age and gender pair for the statements asked on the Palumba App during the European Elections 2024 mission. Due to a lack of data, responses with the label “non-binary” and “prefer not to answer” are not displayed.

Young people, regardless of gender, support lowering the voting age to 16, a policy already implemented in several EU countries, as they seek greater empowerment and political agency. The desire to make a change could result from a broader sense of disenfranchisement, with only one in five young Europeans feeling they have influence over decisions affecting their lives (Kasnitz, 2023). Nonetheless, the youth continues to have a positive outlook on the EU as an organisation, since 55% of 18-25 year olds are satisfied with democracy in the EU (eupinions data, as of 03/2024). Generation Z most likely supports the enlargement of the EU on average because they profit from its benefits – globalisation, freedom and cultural exchange. The youth considers all these as positive attributes, as such globalisation is seen as an opportunity by 68% of 18-25 year olds (eupinions data, as of 03/2024). 

In conclusion, the data gathered during Palumba’s 2024 European elections mission – drawing from over 170.000 responses by youth across Europe – reveals a nuanced perspective of Generation Z. A gender divide is certainly apparent in topics, such as climate change and LGBTQIA+ rights. However, young women and men do continue to align on other issues: lowering the voting age and potentially enlarging the European Union. Now, the question remains whether the existing divisions will deepen, resulting in a “global gender divide”, exactly as the Financial Times Report predicted. Or will we start making an effort to foster dialogue? Generation Z is the future and must act accordingly.

Last edited on: 19.11.2025