Political dynasties are pervasive in modern democracies. A growing literature shows both that dynastic politicians enjoy a considerable electoral advantage and that this advantage has played a key role in facilitating women’s access to political office. While existing research identifies several mechanisms behind these patterns, the role of voters has been largely overlooked. In this paper, we start filling this gap by studying whether voters have a preference for (or against) politicians with dynastic backgrounds. To explore this question, we conduct a survey experiment in Pakistan, a country where dynasties are common, both in general and particularly in the case of successful female candidates. We find that members of dynasties are perceived to be of lower quality and seen as less likely to support universalistic policies compared to their non-dynastic peers. Moreover, learning that a politician has dynastic ties decreases respondents’ reported likelihood of voting for them but not their perceived electability, suggesting that the electoral advantage of dynastic candidates is explained by elite-driven mechanisms. Finally, we also uncover evidence of a double standard, with dynastic female politicians being perceived as particularly susceptible to the influence of their families but not dynastic males. Thus, while political dynasties have significantly increased women’s descriptive representation, they have also generated a so-called “label effect” that reinforces negative stereotypes about women in politics.