Following her electoral 2016 electoral loss, Hillary embarked on her Great Delusion Tour. Traipsing about the country, Hillary had reason aplenty why she lost. Conveniently, Hillary’s electoral loss was the fault of everyone but her.

One of her many campaign foes? White fathers, boyfriends, and husbands. The white patriarchy, you see, has an unseen, powerful influence on white women and was magically able to dissuade them from voting for “the girl”, Hillary claimed.

Last September, The Guardian used a study from Oregon State to prove that white women are pawns of the patriarchy.

Last week, Clinton, who has had a lifetime to contemplate the women’s vote, copped to having a theory. “[Women] will be under tremendous pressure – and I’m talking principally about white women. They will be under tremendous pressure from fathers and husbands and boyfriends and male employers not to vote for ‘the girl’,” she said in an interview as part of a tour promoting her new memoir of the 2016 campaign.

People might scoff at the idea that women vote based on what husbands and fathers tell them to do. And tens of millions of dollars in political messaging has been spent based on the assumption that women will vote collectively on equal pay, abortion, and other salient issues regarding women’s autonomy.

But social science backs up Clinton’s anecdotal hunch. “We think she was right in her analysis about women getting pressure from men in their lives, specifically [straight] white women,” said Kelsy Kretschmer, an assistant professor at Oregon State University and a co-author of a recent study examining women’s voting patterns.

“We know white men are more conservative, so when you’re married to a white man you get a lot more pressure to vote consistent with that ideology.”

Somewhat lazily, the Washington Post regurgitated the Oregon State study in their efforts to prove Hillary’s But The Patriarchy!™ argument was worth considering.

But they took it to the next level by including a study from the Institute for Social and Economic Research, part of Columbia University, which suggest that marriage and evangelical Christianity “interact with white supremacy to influence white women’s political behavior.” This same scholar is also part of the Democracy Alliance, a massive prog fundraising cabal. So I’m sure their motives here are totally pure.

A study from the Institute for Social and Economic Research reported that wives in general vote in ways that support their husband’s economic interests. And most men voted for Trump in 2016 with many citing his economic policies as a major factor as to why.

And Julie Kohler, who holds a Ph.D. in family social science, wrote that a vote for the Republican party is often deemed as the most logical one for married women — especially when factoring in race and faith.

“Systemic influences like marriage and evangelical Christianity interact with white supremacy to influence white women’s political behavior, through the explicit ideologies they propagate and the more insidious ways they reflect and perpetuate other structural inequalities,” the senior vice president for the Democracy Alliance, a progressive donor network wrote in the Nation.

But economics also play a huge factor, something Clinton and others criticizing pro-Trump women’s votes don’t often acknowledge.

“The gender pay gap, for example, has the practical effect of privileging men’s careers—particularly white men’s—over women’s and yoking white women’s economic interests to their husbands’. So for some married white women, a vote for the Republican candidate may appear to be the self-interested choice,” Kohler added.

Not only are you a mindless drone if you happen to be a white woman did not vote for Trump, you’ve also been influenced by white supremacy. Amazing, really. It’s inconceivable to far too many academics that white women, like myself, chose not to vote for Hillary because she was a terrible candidate.

Rather than respect our choices, these researchers have spent hours, day, weeks even, attempting to explain away the free-thinking, independent woman’s decision-making process, going so far as to pretend research backs up their theory that we all taking voting orders from our husbands. SPOILER: We do not.

If you want to find yourself in the middle of a group of ferociously independent, stubborn women, look no further than the Conservative movement. I can assure you we take orders from no one, least of all men deigning to tell us what and how to think and act.

The only thing these academics and journalists have proved is that they’re just as delusional as Hillary.