That 'nasty', 'vicious', and 'unfeminine' are recent descriptions of prominent women politicians showcases the persistence of sexism in politics. However, causally identifying the presence of gender bias in the judgement of women's behaviour is challenging. In this research, I assess whether voters are biased in how they perceive and evaluate the ways in which politicians communicate. To address this, I design a survey experiment where UK voters are presented with arguments representative of a range of styles congruent with gender stereotypes. The MP gender, argument style, and policy area are manipulated to assess, first, whether there is a backlash effect when politicians violate gender-based stereotypes, and second, whether voters' differential perception of the styles themselves might explain this backlash. While I find that style usage has important consequences for voters' evaluations of the likeability and competence of MPs, this does not vary by MP gender. The results suggest that, at least in the UK, women politicians do not need to conform to stereotypical expectations to be positively evaluated by voters.