The media depicts Hillary's gender as "divisive," and Obama's race as "unifying." When a man has knowledge and experience, he's seen as "wise," but Hillary's knoweldge and experience, make her "old" and a "know it all."

Sexism is deeply rooted in our culture, and we aren't even able to discuss it because the media always changes the subject to race.

Oh well. Get ready for President McCain or President Romney.

Obama isn't a woman, Hilary isn't a man. Should they somehow trade bodies? The point then is that Obama isn't a woman and Hilary isn't a man? Yes, I think we'll all agree to that.

So we should treat Obama differently because he isn't a woman and Hilary differently because she isn't a man? How confusing this is all becoming. Would Nancy Pelosi cut it as a man? Would Al Gore cut it as a woman? What in the hell is this about?

Are men and women treated differently by men and women? Should men and women not be treated differently by men and women? But then there'd be no men or women.

Would anyone be listening to Steinem if she was a man?

Would you Catherine be writing for Broadsheet if you were a man?

Okay, let's all just be Beings, that'll settle things.

I love Gloria Steinem, or did until I read her Op-Ed today.

Sorry Gloria, I'm one of those younger women who did the less radical thing of backing a candidate because they actually voted for and proposed platforms for the policies I think need to be implemented.

HRC lost me because she backed Bush on the war, because she's given every indication that she supports an attack against Iran, because she's the largest single recipient of lobby money from health insurance and big pharma (and then actually justified it by saying "lobbyists represent real people" -- please, how dumb do you think I am?). Whenever it's come down to a question of whether to protect big industry vs the small guy, she's come down squarely with big industry. On every issue other than reproductive rights, she votes with the GOP. She's a Dem in name only.

I wanted to like HRC, and I am excited that we have a woman as genuine front-runner for the presidency. I love that she was able to be successful in the law when she was -- I owe the job I have today to women like her. But come on, if she can't forward policies that protect us from corporate America (including that good old bugaboo the military-industrial complex), how is she going to forward the interests of women?

It is possible to disagree with a candidate based on their record, and not because you've been brainwashed by the patriarchy.