The point is, no one will say, and few will even realize, that gendered perceptions played a major role in how they viewed Hillary Clinton and responded to her candidacy. Progressives make an effort to engage in considering how the intersection of identity influenced things whereas people on the right tend not to want to have that conversation—Venice Italy does it himself when he throws out a pretty unlikely example just for theatrics and then asserts, basically, that people wouldn’t see or care about these differences and that invoking the “isms” is “an excuse.” That’s total willful blindness.
And since, as I’ve said, people don’t tend to knowingly act out of discriminatory instincts, by the time the rough and tumble was over, these folks would just “have a bad feeling” about this person and stay home. VeniceItaly could very well be an exception, but when you cast your lot in with ignorant bigots and racists, you reap what you sow.
Call it a bubble, but I do not choose to surround myself with people who support politicians who debase and put down groups of marginalized people. If you vote GOP, that’s what you are doing whether it’s your intention or not. And it’s way too common that these people make excuses for themselves and others for the side effects of “what ends up happening” to minorities than actually taking responsibility and making a change. “The people I’d otherwise have” don’t stick around when you actually demand what is required for equitability. My aunt isn’t a racist until someone gently asks her to reconsider using the term “cotton pickin’.” Then she’s a victim and how dare anybody suggest that she’s ever done anything unthoughtful towards people of colour! I’ve lost interest—they don’t want change because they frankly don’t care. They’d rather be comfortable.
Which brings me to the actual point. The idea that the Republican Party would ever nominate a black trans pansexual is in itself totally disingenuous—that is more what I was getting at. I don’t apologize for making that claim. I don’t hang around people who think sexism is an imaginary “excuse.” Sue me.
Nobody thought about her gender when voting against her. Also didn't she call african-american youths "super predators" back in the 90s? People thought about her flip-flopping, her demeaning comment towards middle american working class, her email scandal. Sexism played no significant role and ill say it again, sexism is an excuse for her running a terrible campaign and excuse for the fact she is a terrible person. More people voted for her because she was a woman rather than people voting against her because she is a woman. Personally I would be ashamed if our first female president was someone as horrendous and opportunistic as she was and I'm glad she won't be our first female president.
