Letters to the Editor
-
@Greeneyedkzin
Read the FT I gather? I liked that column too btw...
-
Not true!
I've been against Hillary from the start -- despite the fct that she's a woman! She's just bloody political and always looking for the angles and I really wanted something different. I can think of lots of women I would vote for, even over Obama or -- my original candidate -- John Edwards. But none ofthem were running.
-
This is so difficult
As a woman who can do high level math, in other words, a freak of nature that isn't even supposed to EXIST in the human genome according to the fans of Larry Summers, I have experienced this hatred of women, so I know it exists.
However, that's not why I voted for Obama instead of Clinton.
-
Oh Please not again
I'm a woman and I am sick to death of mysogyny being blamed
for Hilary's defeat. It's not hate of all women, just this woman. It's not even hate of Hillary. I had a lot of respect for both Bill & Hillary, until this presidential campaign. There was more sexism from Bill and her supporters than the press. After all Bill kept calling her "girl". Sha ran a bad campaign
Here are the real reasons she is losing:
1.Obama is a better candidate,is more likable, and and has a well organized an strategic campaign.
2. Hillary's campaign was in chaos for most of the primary.
3.35 years of Experience: She over played her experience by using Bill's thus turning off many woman.
4.Money : Her campaign was already in debt in IA. Hillary depended on BIG contributors and drained them midway into the primary. She did not even start an online fund raising campaign until after March. Her supporters did not have the same kind of giving power as Obama's. Her big supporters turned to Obama.
4. Hillary's campaign under estimated the dislike for Bill. Brining Bill and his cabinet on stage in NH increased the fear of Bill in the White House.
4.Instead of being strategic Hillary's caapaign was over egotistic and counted on Super Tuesday Big wins. Obama figured out the delegates counts for each state and where he could win delegates. Then Hillary started dismissing delegate counts.
5.Race :Bill played the race card in SC, increasing African American's support of Obama. Hillary played up into the Rev. Wright race baiting.
6.Gender: Hillary constantly played the 'gender" card making real feminist run from her. Then whined about sexism.
7. Taking the Low road: Hillary's first LOW point in the campaign is when she showed up in Fl to declare a victory.
Her constant playing up MI & Fl delegates every time she lost.
8.Bitter hypocracy: Pandering to the working class with unsound promises, using the "bitter" card, when she Obama showed up in her fund raising niegborhood to raise money.
9. Bio-polar actions: Tearing up for the sympathy vote one minute. Playing TOUGH the next.
10. Stubbornness!!!! Her advisers and the hysterical MI super delegates showing up on TV constantly spinning the truth was a BIG turn off to super delegates.
-
"For some, the appeal of a candidate goes beyond their gender."
That is why I am an Obama supporter.
My vote for Obama doesn't mean I think it's right, or even a good idea, to make gender-based attacks on Clinton. At the very least, it is ad hominem. At most, it is hateful and counterproductive and unprogressive.
No one said she lost the nomination because of misogyny. The point of the article was that now that she has lost (for various reasons) we won't have to endure all the shameless, apparently acceptable, misogyny.
Instead, we can look forward to shameless, apparently acceptable race- and age-based ad hominem attacks. I can't wait!
Sigh.
-
Misogyny's a pretty strong word
In this campaign, it's very difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. I saw a broad range of emotion in regard to Mrs. Clinton, much of it given forth by people who were not voting in the Democratic primary. And one cannot paint the Republicans with too narrow a brush here. Many people have good, or what they consider good, reasons to dislike Mrs. Clinton.
If Mr. Obama had not entered the race, Mrs. Clinton would likely have run away with the nomination. And, while that would have resulted in a bitter presidential campaign, one must take care in insisting that Republicans are misogynist. If you will look closely at the Republican party, you will see Republican women in office and running the day-to-day work of the party.
I know a good number of Republicans and haven't heard any general misogynistic comments from a Republican in years. And believe me, there was a day when women's unfitness for the highest office was openly discussed. Like it or not, the success of Margaret Thatcher put a cap on most of that.
Now, that's not to say there have been NO inappropriate comments about Mrs. Clinton--much of it centered on her looks, her demeanor and her husband. Just as Democrats still mock Florida's Mrs. Harris for wearing too much makeup or Mr. Limbaugh's girth, there is often more focus on form rather than substance, as a sort of shorthand for distaste, I suppose.
But these kinds of ad hominem attacks should not be confused with bias toward a particular gender, style of dress or weight.
-
Hmm...
You know...it kind of strikes me that every example offered (with the possible example of the Nut Craker, which is ment as "joke" all be it an unfunny one) is excusable as an attack on Senator Clinton Herself, and not necessisarily and attack on her as a woman.
Calling her a scolding mother, points out that she's scolding, not that she's a mother. And depending on the context was possibly entirely apprpropriate.
Being called cold, or a whore, or any other item doesn't deride someone for being a woman, it derides them for who they are perceived as. The arguments may be wholely untrue, but they are legitimate arguments if that is someones perception.
All reports from those who know him best state that Richard Cheney is a warm loving grandfather who cares deeply about his country and its people. But he's still a Dick to most people, and his status as a Dick isn't because he's a man, it's because he's a Dick, at least in some peoples minds.
John Kerry and Al Gore were both wooden, distant, and cold. They were often dimunized by their opponents, as many on the left dimunize George W. Bush.
Yes Misogyny exists, but criticism of a woman isn't by it's self proof of misogyny. Any more than intra-feminist criticism is misogynistic.