Clinton: 'Misogyny played a role' in 2016 - Polidicks

[QUOTE=-nesto-;52118294]If she cried about pop vote shed be a cunt and an idiot.[/QUOTE] not really, the electoral college is utter shit. crying about the pop vote is seen as the cry of the sore loser tho, and the dems have a lot invested in the current system (both the fact of them being establishment therefore predisposed toward the status quo and also the weird belief that after obama they've go t a stronghold on the presidency which i don't think her loss has completely dispelled)

Trump says dumb shit on the regular, shocking. Whats that gotta do with Clinton?

I think misogyny was definitely a factor but the largest factor is that Clinton is a better executive than she is a campaigner. The fact that she's a shitty campaigner should have been obvious in retrospect of 2008.

[QUOTE=Bird;52117558]I'll agree with Clinton when she admits that it was antisemitic to not vote for Sanders in the primaries.[/QUOTE] Good lord. She's not saying "if you didn't vote for me you hate women," she said "misogyny played a role." It did. You can look up thousands of posts on Facebook and social media of people complaining that we shouldn't have a woman as president because she might start a war when she's on her period. There are a [I]lot[/I] of people who believe women are not capable of leading this country. Some use it to push other excuses, like that other world leaders wouldn't take her seriously, or "how would she stand up to Putin?" or shit like that. Others just flat-out say women are incapable of leaving their homes. I lived in Texas. I've seen people say that shit. There are tons of people who think women are too fragile and precious and immature to handle leadership. You're in Finland, you might not see the same shit, but many parts of the US are unbelievably backwards and it'd shock you what people believe about gender roles. I think that elitism, overconfidence, and aloofness were way more central in the failure of the Clinton campaign, but misogyny and gender stereotypes absolutely played a role. Saying otherwise is braindead ignorance.

It's okay to admit that some people didn't vote for Clinton because they're sexist, and also admit that she ran a garbage campaign and was, in many other ways, a garbage candidate. Although I do feel it's a bit off to say that just because it "played a role" it's worth talking about no matter what. Malaria played a role, too, because it very likely prevented at least 1 person from voting. But nobody's really talking about how malaria "played a role" in the 2016 election. The difference is the magnitude of the role people think these factors have.

I really wish Clinton wasn't [B]the[/B] person to lead the cause of emancipation she subscribes to. It feels like when massively pro-status quo, old money pandering muppets putting the centre of mass of their progressive angle to a tokenized real issue that they have some sort of "birthright" to, however which they seem to put very little force behind when it comes to breaking the bread, seems to hurt the causes of these issues. For Obama it was the racial issue, for her it was the gender issue. I am not saying either of them weren't progressive [I]whatsoever[/I] in anything but these tokens, but it's definitely been what they seemed to popularise the hardest. It's symptomatic of the Democratic party's current purpose of serving as the more socially acceptable muppet box for the old money - they need a person who gonna 100% uphold the status quo, yet must have some sort of harmless quirk that will allow them to still appear progressive in some way.

I have a problem with this because how can you objectively quantify this. I see anecdotal evidence and I could raise the same, as I saw many people claiming support for her just because she is a woman. Especially among women, who's to that didn't play a role and it's based on identity just the same. Also, the complaining as if she's a victim is so distasteful. Dare I say bitchy?

[QUOTE=Talvy;52117556]'Certainly played a role' does not mean it was the main reason. It means it played a role, certainly. It's not impossible to tell what people actually mean vs. what it sounds like.[/QUOTE] Yeah, the issue is that she glosses over or ignores the other issues (the more significant ones, which are actually her own failings) and therefore, by giving this particular aspect of her failure more attention, makes misogyny out to be the main reason she failed. Misogyny played a part, yes, but I don't see her admitting that her campaign was awful, ignored a huge voterbase for cheap point scoring, and that her collusion with the DNC might've been ill-judged. She doesn't want to admit that she did anything wrong, so she ignores the larger aspects of the tapestry of her failure for repeatedly bringing up the one where she can say that she did nothing wrong.

Misogyny played a part for sure. The question is how big was that part? Most people would say fairly insignificant compared to her campaigns many failings.

What's this discussion about "cunt" being on par with "nigger" in terms of how sexist/racist it is to say it? It's not even a gendered insult, in fact I've seen more men be called cunts than women. I'd see your point if it was a double-standard sex-shaming insult like slut or whore, but that's not the case here.

So, uh, what about all the women I know who didn't like her because of her policies? I was texting my mom last year and we were discussing the various elections. My mom is a democrat in her mid-50s, but has more conservative leanings in regards to some things. She told me, and I quote, "I want a woman president, but I don't think Hillary is the right one."

[QUOTE=SadisticGecko;52120658]So, uh, what about all the women I know who didn't like her because of her policies? I was texting my mom last year and we were discussing the various elections. My mom is a democrat in her mid-50s, but has more conservative leanings in regards to some things. She told me, and I quote, "I want a woman president, but I don't think Hillary is the right one."[/QUOTE] Two words: Internalized Misogyny

[QUOTE=_Axel;52120621]What's this discussion about "cunt" being on par with "nigger" in terms of how sexist/racist it is to say it? It's not even a gendered insult, in fact I've seen more men be called cunts than women. I'd see your point if it was a double-standard sex-shaming insult like slut or whore, but that's not the case here.[/QUOTE] It's a lot more offensive in the US than it is in Europe, IIRC. I don't quite get it either.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;52120661]Two words: Internalized Misogyny[/QUOTE] [T]http://cdn.akamai.steamstatic.com/steamcommunity/public/images/avatars/69/6901349569213c10356e679cd43278518f9b8971_medium.jpg[/T]

I honestly did not pick up on it during the entire election. Polls the news and interviews with the public it never felt like her being female was on anyones mind. It felt like she was the only one that cared she is a woman.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;52118702]I think misogyny was definitely a factor but the largest factor is that Clinton is a better executive than she is a campaigner. The fact that she's a shitty campaigner should have been obvious in retrospect of 2008.[/QUOTE] That's actually the #1 factor, #2 if you count the electoral college. I'm going to be bold and say that none of her scandals lost her the election. Anyone who says that's the reason or the tipping point to vote for Trump was going to vote for Trump regardless if she had a clean record. Clinton focused too much on minorities, and too little on the middle-class. People vote what's bests for themselves, and not their country.

[QUOTE=Dave_Parker;52120829]Yeah SadisticGecko, go tell your mom she's a huge bigot.[/QUOTE] Well, to be fair, when it comes to LGBT stuff, she is. But nah. You can go tell her. I don't feel like being ranted at for two hours.

I wouldn't deny that misogyny played a minor role in her downfall, but not to the extent that people see her as being bad for being "brave" or "courageous". Given Marie Le Pen is the embodiment of all of these characteristics and most of the people that voted against Hillary love her. On the other side of the same coin; Misandry definitely played a role in the election against Don'. Given the fact there was a gigantic "[i]Woman's March[/i]" the day after President Trump was inaugurated, specifically protesting that a man was sworn into office. [img_thumb]https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/01/22/us/22march8/22march8-superJumbo.jpg[/img_thumb] Do you think there would ever be a march/protest over a woman being voted in? I don't think so.

[QUOTE=Cureless;52121153]I wouldn't deny that misogyny played a minor role in her downfall, but not to the extent that people see her as being bad for being "brave" or "courageous". Given Marie Le Pen is the embodiment of all of these characteristics and most of the people that voted against Hillary love her. On the other side of the same coin; Misandry definitely played a role in the election against Don'. Given the fact there was a gigantic "[I]Woman's March[/I]" the day after President Trump was inaugurated, specifically protesting that a man was sworn into office. [img_thumb]https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/01/22/us/22march8/22march8-superJumbo.jpg[/img_thumb] Do you think there would ever be a march/protest over a woman being voted in? I don't think so.[/QUOTE] It was less because he was a man, and more that america elected someone that is a recorded supporter of sexual harassment.

[QUOTE=_Axel;52120621]What's this discussion about "cunt" being on par with "nigger" in terms of how sexist/racist it is to say it? It's not even a gendered insult, in fact I've seen more men be called cunts than women. I'd see your point if it was a double-standard sex-shaming insult like slut or whore, but that's not the case here.[/QUOTE] Bitch is gendered. Cunt less so outside the US but bitch certainly is. Yeah you can call men bitches but traditionally it's aimed at women.

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;52121217]Bitch is gendered. Cunt less so outside the US but bitch certainly is. Yeah you can call men bitches but traditionally it's aimed at women.[/QUOTE] I was only referring to "cunt" tho.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;52120661]Two words: Internalized Misogyny[/QUOTE] That isn't an example of it, because she dislikes Hillary for other reasons but still understands that a woman is just as capable of being a president as a man. Internalized misogyny is the braindead women I know who flat-out say "men are meant to take care of women, women aren't supposed to be leading, it's embarrassing that women nowadays can't cook a meal for their man, women are supposed to X, Y, and Z, and if a woman does A she's neglecting her biology, women who don't have children are a disgrace, a woman's job is to care for her children..." That type of shit is internalized misogyny. It's a real thing, as meme-ified and TRIGGERED a phrase as it's become. If a woman actively wants to be a caretaker and a stay-at-home-mom and fulfill old gender roles, that's their right. Women have agency, and some want to do that, and that's absolutely perfectly okay. But if a woman is pushed by internalized societal gender roles to behave in a certain way and perceive "womanhood" as [I]exclusively[/I] those gender roles, then they've internalized misogynistic and antiquated perceptions of what they're "allowed" to do by society. Internalized misogyny is just a more specific kind of peer pressure. There's the same thing for men, it's just less discussed. The ideas that men don't cry, that men need to be strong, that men need to protect women, that men are supposed to pay for the meal when on a date, that men shouldn't talk about their emotions, that men shouldn't confide in others about their issues, all of that. And those suck, because those roles reinforce that social pressure. But every time I mention the words "internalized misogyny" half the people on the internet stick their thumbs in their ears and go "TRIGGERED SJW," so I just stick to more generic and neutral terms like "social pressure." I can hardly say "gender roles" without people kneejerking into some edgy anti-SJW cool kid with all the dank memes.

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;52121217]Bitch is gendered. Cunt less so outside the US but bitch certainly is. Yeah you can call men bitches but traditionally it's aimed at women.[/QUOTE] I have never considered a word to be gendered. I call men and women a bitch, cunt, or dick. It's only an issue because it's been manufactured into an issue, just like "swears are naughty. " They're only bad because someone decided it's bad but in reality it's just another word. And even still, outside of the US you have [i]men[/i] calling their [i]male[/i] friends a cunt in a friendly manner which only reinforces my point.

[QUOTE=Cureless;52121153]I wouldn't deny that misogyny played a minor role in her downfall, but not to the extent that people see her as being bad for being "brave" or "courageous". Given Marie Le Pen is the embodiment of all of these characteristics and most of the people that voted against Hillary love her. On the other side of the same coin; Misandry definitely played a role in the election against Don'. Given the fact there was a gigantic "[i]Woman's March[/i]" the day after President Trump was inaugurated, specifically protesting that a man was sworn into office. [img_thumb]https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/01/22/us/22march8/22march8-superJumbo.jpg[/img_thumb] Do you think there would ever be a march/protest over a woman being voted in? I don't think so.[/QUOTE] I was unaware protesting a garbage person for his garbage opinions was misandry

Hilary Clinton played a role in 2016 elections

[QUOTE=cdr248;52117212]you can't say it didn't play a role but its like one tiny thing surrounded by 30 other things[/QUOTE] Sure, and there are people who voted for her just because she was a woman.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52123425]Sure, and there are people who voted for her just because she was a woman.[/QUOTE] It was actually pretty amazing how crazy the campaigning by some supporters got. This did go multiple ways, but gender is one of those things that says [I]nothing[/I] about whether someone should have a political office.

To be fair she wasn't just a woman, she was a woman with 30 years of experience in the political field.

[QUOTE=Cureless;52121153]I wouldn't deny that misogyny played a minor role in her downfall, but not to the extent that people see her as being bad for being "brave" or "courageous". Given Marie Le Pen is the embodiment of all of these characteristics and most of the people that voted against Hillary love her. On the other side of the same coin; Misandry definitely played a role in the election against Don'. Given the fact there was a gigantic "[i]Woman's March[/i]" the day after President Trump was inaugurated, specifically protesting that a man was sworn into office. [img_thumb]https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/01/22/us/22march8/22march8-superJumbo.jpg[/img_thumb] Do you think there would ever be a march/protest over a woman being voted in? I don't think so.[/QUOTE] this definitely would have happened if sanders had got elected

[QUOTE=Tamschi;52124677]It was actually pretty amazing how crazy the campaigning by some supporters got. This did go multiple ways, but gender is one of those things that says [I]nothing[/I] about whether someone should have a political office.[/QUOTE] This. A lot of her supporters (and even some parts of her campaign) went on about having the first woman president, and while I certainly wouldn't mind a woman president, I'd prefer one that's more fit for the job, though I did end up voting for her because lolno@Trump. [editline]19th April 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Lambeth;52124845]To be fair she wasn't just a woman, she was a woman with 30 years of experience in the political field.[/QUOTE] Throughout my work history, if there's anything I've learned after working under people, it's that experience doesn't necessarily equate to competence. The same can be said of Trump's business experience, obviously.