Last week, I drove to Des Moines to attend a meeting of women presided over by two of the foremost leaders on women’s issues, Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, both U.S. senators. My first impression was that the two senators were just another pair in an ocean of surrogates inundating Iowa, trying to convince people that Bruce Braley is the right choice for Iowa. 

After interviewing the two senators, I now realize the importance of their visit. It’s been very subtle, but Braley has had a difficult time confronting Joni Ernst over the issue of women’s reproductive rights. Sure, the TV ads and stump speeches highlight Ernst’s attempt to pass a personhood amendment. However, I’ve seen many voters cut to the quick and point out Braley’s diminished credibility in the realm of women’s issues simply as a result of him being a man.

Ernst’s campaign has tagged her as a “Mother. Soldier. Independent Leader.” The Republican Party saw Ernst, a woman, as a perfectly marketable counterweight to the “war on women” narrative, and they ran with it. It’s no wonder the Democratic Party has invited female leaders such as Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton and Sens. Murray and Cantwell to break through the guise.

Yet, as Sens. Murray and Cantwell have emphasized, it’s not enough to be a woman or a mother and therefore be a credible representative of women and mothers. 

As Sen. Murray told me, “It’s not just about electing women. It’s about electing women who will fight for the issues that are important to women. Protecting a woman’s right to make their own healthcare decisions, protecting a woman’s ability to have a fair and equal pay so that they can provide for their family, making sure that young women can go to college and get a student loan or a Pell Grant … its about the agenda you come with.”

Ernst’s record as a legislator shows that her views have traditionally run counter to what is most fundamental to women. She has introduced and continues to support a personhood amendment, which would declare legal rights to fetuses at the moment of fertilization. Even the National Right to Life Committee has declared the personhood strategy “a waste of time” and “potentially very dangerous.” This strain of radicalism would completely disintegrate women’s reproductive rights.

Ernst has also run against raising the federal minimum wage, instead dabbling in the idea of completely dissolving any federally mandated wage floor. Despite this being contrary to our most basic economic principles, minimum wage increases dramatically affect the lives of single mothers. Yet Ernst’s campaign has tried to increase her stock by marketing her nurturing, motherly features.

When I asked Sen. Murray about the difficulties Braley has had in pinning down Ernst’s anti-women policies, she stated, “I think its always a challenge because I think when most women see a woman candidate they say, ‘She’s going to vote the same way I would,’ but in this state it is not the case. Very clearly, [Ersnt] has supported the personhood amendment … Overall, that is not what women support.”

I asked Sen. Cantwell the same question, and she said, “I’ve been in Iowa for two days, and I’ve met a bunch of women who have been involved in the battle in making sure that access to healthcare is protected, and the first thing they said to us is that [Braley] has already been there for us in the House of Representatives, and that’s what women look for.”

If anybody has credibility when talking about the most fundamental aspects of women’s issues, it’s Sens. Murray and Cantwell. Both senators have a proven track record of supporting and introducing legislation that advances women’s reproductive rights. Both have repeatedly stated that Ernst’s plans would be devastating for women in Iowa and across the country.

Many women in Iowa likely see themselves underrepresented in the U.S. Senate. The state of Iowa has never elected a woman to the Congress. In response to the women voting for Ernst merely because she is a woman, Sen. Murray said, “I share all of the anxieties of women in the need for women voices, but what women don’t want is the wrong voice for them, they want the right voices for them because at the end of day, it’s about what you work for, what you fight for and how you use your voice.”

Ernst holds a 15-percentage point lead among likely male voters while Braley holds a 12-point percentage lead among women voters. Therein lies the true substance of this election. It is inherently gender-skewed because women see Ernst for exactly what she represents. Men don’t.

Ernst’s election would be a step backward rather than a step forward in breaking the glass ceiling. Although a woman voting for Ernst would be a woman betraying her gender, the real issue is men who don’t understand women’s rights. Why am I not surprised?