Locker Room Banter

We Now Know What Trump’s “Locker Room Banter” Looks Like

The locker room, in the mind of the president, is where misogyny is not only permitted but protected.

Inae Oh

It seems quaint to think about now. But in October 2016, just one month away from the presidential election that would fundamentally warp American politics, the biggest threat to Donald Trump’s candidacy was a 2005 Access Hollywood recording that caught Trump bragging about “grabbing” unconsenting women “by the pussy.” As a celebrity and a man of prominence, Trump claimed that he “could do anything” and get away with it.

At the time, the backlash was fierce, prompting a scrambled Trump to justify his comments as “locker room banter.” He also claimed, with the classic whataboutism that has become a hallmark for this political era, that “Bill Clinton has said far worse to me on the golf course.”

And it was effective, a neat shorthand for “boys will be boys,” a genre of apparent comedy where some level of lewdness should not only be free, but protected. It previewed a misogyny that would only get worse through anti-abortion policies, dozens of sexual assault allegations, and eventually, the Epstein files. Fast forward to 2026, and we have another glimpse of what the president means by “locker room banter.”

They share the same misogyny familiar to many of us. That men are owed by women to accept insulting banter. That they are entitled to have their disrespect overlooked.

“I must tell you, we’re going to have to bring the women’s team, you do know that,” Trump toldthe US Olympic men’s hockey team after they won gold on Sunday. The men in the room, who had just received an invitation to the State of the Union, laugh boisterously, maybe in agreement. Trump then takes another crack: He’d “probably be impeached,” he said, if he didn’t extend an invitation to the US Olympics women’s hockey team, which, as it happened, also won gold at the Milan Cortina Olympics last week.

The moment has since ignited an outrage, not because it was especially offensive; it wasn’t. But for women watching, Trump’s remarks and the ensuing laughter felt specific in its familiarity, a classic case of men telling a woman one thing to her face and something hurtful or untoward when it’s just the guys. That includes Jack Hughes, who scored the winning goal for Team USA and said the first person he thought of after scoring was Megan Keller—only to laugh along as the president insulted her team.

For Trump, his remarks are fitting for a man caught bragging about sexual assault. Though Trump’s call with the men’s hockey team is not the same as the Access Hollywood recording—one is dismissive, the other sexually violent—they share the same misogyny familiar to many of us. That men are owed by women to accept insulting banter. That they are entitled to have their disrespect overlooked.

Some people may argue that it’s better not to make a fuss, that this is a rare moment of unity for the country, so why spoil it? But consider that the women’s team has declined Trump’s invitation to attend the State of the Union. It may be an act of defiance, a shot-in-the-arm kind of rejection we crave to see of Trump. But any relief found in such defiance disappears because it necessitates a woman opting out and foregoing what is deserved. This is how the logic of misogyny works: a masculine-coded joke, said within the confines of a masculine-coded room, for women to then adjust and lose out.