yes, I did read your diary. And it seems that your diary is in response to Angry Mouse's diary and your own comment there. You went on a rant there and then decided to create your own diary based on that misinformed rant
I quote you here
I'm a white male who voted for Obama. I voted for a white female in my state house primary, a white female in my assembly race, and will be campaigning and voting for a native female in our Congressional primary. MY vote, at least, is NOT sexist. Frankly, I'm sick and f-ing tired of being called sexist because I chose Obama over Clinton. Are folks from West Virginia sexist? Ohio? Pennsylvania? New York? Or is it only the states she lost, like Illinois? Louisiana? Minnesota? Wisconsin?
MY vote, at least, is NOT sexist.
Frankly, I'm sick and f-ing tired of being called sexist because I chose Obama over Clinton.
Are folks from West Virginia sexist? Ohio? Pennsylvania? New York? Or is it only the states she lost, like Illinois? Louisiana? Minnesota? Wisconsin?
which you were corrected on, btw.
I found her diary to be wholly concerned with using sexism as the cause of Hillary's campaign's demise.
I'm not sure how you can make the case that sexism is the cause of your demise without inferring, in at least a very small way, that those who voted against your candidate are sexist.
If I misunderstood, I'll defer.
The Angry Mouse diary (which I also misinterpreted at first) is about sexism and politics in a much larger sense and it's full of passion and logic.
Read the last 3 paragraphs of that post especially:
But the problem will not be fixed. The next time a woman runs for president, we will face it again. Is she tough enough? Too tough? Are her clothes too boring or too revealing? Is she too young? Too old? Are her ankles too fat? Is her hair just right? How often does she sleep with her husband? Are her successes in life really her own? Diamonds or pearls? Don't tell me sexism isn't real. Don't tell me it is irrelevant. Don't tell me it isn't a problem -- a serious problem -- that the Democratic party must address. If we have the courage to face up to our dark and disdainful history of racism, and even the courage to face the racism that exists today, even within our own party, certainly, somewhere deep within our souls, we have the courage to face up to sexism. At least, I hope we do.
Don't tell me sexism isn't real. Don't tell me it is irrelevant. Don't tell me it isn't a problem -- a serious problem -- that the Democratic party must address. If we have the courage to face up to our dark and disdainful history of racism, and even the courage to face the racism that exists today, even within our own party, certainly, somewhere deep within our souls, we have the courage to face up to sexism.
At least, I hope we do.
This current diary also rings true -- not as a rebuttal to Angry Mouse -- but rather to the avalanche of attacks calling Obama and his supporters sexist, and claiming that Hillary is losing because of sexism.
As in most passionate feuds, both sides are right. Hillary may have transcended sexism but the United States most certainly has not and as AM says, the next female candidates will be forced to run the same gauntlet that the population as a whole has to run every day.
Both sides here are guilty of unwittingly conspiring to set up a straw man argument that marginalizes the problem of sexism.
The mistake is making Hillary's campaign a proxy for the problem of gender discrimination. People like myself have spent long hours trying to drive home three points:
Limiting the discussion to these points allows me to win the argument in my own mind without having to deal with the larger argument, for which there is no rebuttal. Everything Angry Mouse says is true, and will continue to be true even if Hillary Clinton becomes President.
What are we going to do about THAT?
