It's mathematics, not sexism. I know many are convinced that we mean ol' "boys" are just beating up on the poor little woman, but that's nothing but ignorance and chutzpah. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
And to dare challenge the leader even though she is only 100 marks off the mark doesn't make her someone with chutzpah, nor her supporters, but the people who can't accept that she is in to win are misogynists.
But that's the kind of argument people make at the Clinton-leaning blogs. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
Whoever wins however, on the night of the last primary, the person who is behind has to come out and using every ounce of political skill and sincerity that they posses declare the other to be the winner. Say that some people on both sides have gone too far during the primary process, and have been dealt with by their respective campaigns. The primary process is now over and that he/she will be happy to do everything in their power to make sure the next president is democratic.
The important thing is to declare the others victory rather than have it declared for you, if you want to have a position going forwards that gives a chance of the ultimate job in the future. Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
sorry, but she is part of the last group of people who got the vote in the USA and that seems to be an issue with many people.
Check out Joan Walsh's column last week on misogyny and HRC at www.salon.com
As for the "this group got the vote last so they deserve a representative as president" argument how do you balance lack of the vote against slavery? I'm not saying one or the other is particularly worse. but if that appraoch is brought up, then how would you deal with the obvious counterclaim? Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
I agree with you that there would be pressure on a male candidate to pull out, though I can also guarantee you that if the situation were reversed Obama supporters would be talking about that being racist.
But your comment here is a perfect example of the sort of oblivious sexism that Clinton supporters talk about. First of all, the only way in which 'misandry' is playing a role in this race is that women are somewhat more likely to vote for Clinton than men - but that of course cuts both ways. Secondly, if you're really going to make that argument you're also going to have to suggest that racism against whites is playing a huge role.
But that's really not the case. It is perfectly normal for a historically oppressed group to vote for one of their own and to be enthusiastic about the idea of achieving this sort of milestone in a still sexist and racist society (albeit far less than it once was). On the other hand for men to vote for someone because they're a man, or whites for the white candidate on racial grounds is something quite different. One is an expression of hope for a symbol of equality after all this time, the other of attempting to preserve inequality.
