Until this AM ....

[Gabu]

And let's not forget this blatant fact: Obama beat Hillary among women in Iowa.

Well, obviously women are self-hating.

[Wakie]

So therefore anyone who doesn't support Hillary must do so because of sexism alone, right?

Not at all the statement or argument I have been making.  Rather my argument has been that the majority of the "knocks" on Hillary are not knocks you would make if she were a man.  Now I also agree that if she were a man she wouldn't have married Bill Clinton and wouldn't be running for President.  In fact the only reason she got this far was because of Bill.  Any other woman would have been stopped sooner.

My point is that the aforementioned "knocks" frequently get thrown out there when it comes to women achieving high positions.  I had believed that my generation was beyond them but I have been proven wrong.  As my generation will represent the control of who gets into the White House for the next 30 years I say we will still see these.  No woman will come this close for at least a generation.

I'm not saying we should elect Hillary because of that, I'm just saying that this is my analysis.  Gabu, I respect the fact that you feel she isn't liberal enough.  I respect anyone who can articulate WHY they don't like her.

I don't respect someone who says "she's too cold" but doesn't feel that way about Al Gore.
I don't respect someone who says "she's too much of an old school politician" but like Bill Clinton for being that way.
I don't respect someone who criticizes her for crying but loves George Bush or other politicians for doing the same.

[Wakie]

He's not saying "I'm voting for Obama because of his race."  He's saying that his mixed race background will help others' perception of Obama's international background.  Whether or not you agree with that statement, it's nothing remotely similar to what you're trying to say it is.

Horse chips.  His statement is that his race will help.  He's saying his race will help with foreign policy and that's one more reason to vote for him.  That is tokenism wrapped up in a pretty little box.

[Wakie]

And let's not forget this blatant fact: Obama beat Hillary among women in Iowa.

Well, obviously women are self-hating.

I've said it before, women are just as guilty as men when it comes to judging women differently than men.

[John Dibble]

I don't respect someone who says "she's too cold" but doesn't feel that way about Al Gore.

I've said she's cold, but I wouldn't feel that way about Al Gore because he's not. At least not in the same context. Al Gore is boring. He's got the charisma of a rock. He'd be a drag at parties. Hillary on the other hand isn't boring. I could see her being fun at parties. She's cold in a different way.

[Gabu]

Okay, well, I suppose I misinterpreted what you were saying; it looked as though you were saying that those not supporting Hillary were doing so because she's a woman.  If that is not what you were saying, I apologize.

Really though, Hillary is a politician.  With politics comes insults.  It's true that women might have different sorts of insult possibilities than men, but I don't really think it occurs to much worse a degree than anyone else.  Like I said, I heard over and over jokes being made about how Kerry and Edwards were gay lovers in the last election.  And how many jokes have been made about how good Edwards' looks are?  Dozens.

I don't really think it has much to do with Hillary's gender.

[elcorazon]

the funny thing is that nearly everyone arguing against wakie is doing so via the use of straw men.  They are putting up arguments that are not what wakie is arguing.  I doubt there's a single regular on this forum who isn't voting for hillary specifically because she's a woman.  Yet, I still believe it hurts her, even among forum regulars, maybe just a few, but still it has an impact indirectly.

And as many have said, one's gender cannot be separated from one's identity.  Hillary wouldn't be who she is if she were a man.  Trying to create a male hillary is silly.

The comments about selecting a "less qualified woman" over a " more qualified man" begin to show a hint of the issue because as we see with Obama, the word "qualified" is different depending on who's using it.

Yes, people do claim that Edwards is unqualified and Obama's unqualified, but it doesn't seem to stick with them nearly as well as it sticks with Hillary.  She's resented much more than Bush or Kennedy or others who have achieved what they have largely due to their accident of birth.  

I dunno.  I'm surprised that more around here can't even seem to try to understand wakie's point.  As if there's no such thing as sexism anymore in any way.  In fact it seems to be the consensus that there's not only no sexism, but women get some sort of favored treatment and tokenism, which clearly is beyond the pale.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.  

Go Obama!!

[Wakie]

At the end of the day I believe America is ready for a black, asian, jewish, or hispanic man to be President.  We're comfortable with men in leadership roles pretty much regardless of race.  We're not as comfortable with women in those roles.

Any time a woman who isn't "hot" runs for office or moves into a top position we hear "She's a d!ke".  Every time.

You don't hear such slurs about men.  No one would come in here and say "Obama's a n!gger".  No one would say "Feingold's a k!ke".  No one would say "Richardson's a wetb@ck".

But with women it is fair game.  And because it is and because it is accepted and considered "fair game" to do that you won't see a woman get to the top.  Hillary got where she did by pure luck.  She may be the wrong woman at the wrong time.  But no other woman will come this close because of the gender stereotypes which are burned into the minds of my generation.

[12th Doctor]

There's no tokenism in the world either, right?

Tiy have to understand... Wakie ius this guy:

http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/weenie.htm

[Wakie]

There's no tokenism in the world either, right?

Tiy have to understand... Wakie ius this guy:

http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/weenie.htm

LOL .... nice.

I kinda thought of you as this guy after Santorum's butt-whipping:

http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/jekylhyde.htm

[12th Doctor]

There's no tokenism in the world either, right?

Tiy have to understand... Wakie ius this guy:

http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/weenie.htm

LOL .... nice.

I kinda thought of you as this guy after Santorum's butt-whipping:

http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/jekylhyde.htm

*Shrug*

Yeah, pretty much.  Point?

[Beet]

Since when did tokenism for the sake of tokenism become a good idea? I'm almost tempted to think that a Clinton defeat (if it happens) would be a sign of political maturity on the issue.

Al, electing the first female President isn't just tokenism. There's a basic hostility to Hillary in one influential segment of our culture, based largely on a combination of her gender and her politics. The ability of our society to get past the bigotry/subculture would be a sign of great maturity.

Ebowed:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think that's a fair counterpoint w.r.t. elected positions. But w.r.t. social attitudes, the 1970s was much more conscious and acknowledging at least, of the inequalities that exist. Today sexism is challenged-- especially among the younger generation-- much, much less often than it would have in the past, and there is arguably a much larger visible quantity of it. I think anti-racism has sunk in more deeply in society than anti-sexism, at least on the surface.