I honestly… just don’t know what to say to all that. But I’ll try.
Yes, women over come the BS they have to put up with, but that doesn’t mean it’s an easy thing to deal with or something to ignore or pretend doesn’t exist. It has a real, measurable effect on our lives and it’s not going to go away just by ignoring it or “getting over it.” Acknowledging that it exists and it’s real and it shapes our choices and opportunities as women is not “weak.” It’s understanding reality and history. Plenty of women overcame the limitations of their lives, but women were also brutalized and destroyed over it. Telling our daughters that “misogyny makes you a better person” is just… I don’t even know. It puts the blame squarely on their shoulders if they don’t rise above it and do twice as good as men are doing. It’s the dreaded politics of respectability and it’s just more misogynistic BS that puts the blame with us. I fully reject it, because men or other women thinking I"m less then is not MY fault. It’s something wrong in their heads, not mine. I’m not responsible for that. Neither are you or Clinton. None of us are. We’re all human and falliable and misogyny means our imperfections are more often used against us.
As for her, was she a weak candidate? Sure. But did you see her opposition? He was a shambling mess who admitted to sexual assault and called for rather racist policies. And he won (though not the popular vote). No one has said that the only reason she lost was because of misogyny, but it played and role and to ignore that is to ignore the reality of billions of women, to break ranks with them, and to blame them for things outside of their control. To that, I say fuck that. Fuck that useless, individualistic, and dehumanizing mode of thought.
Unfortunately, it’s a counterfactual and we can’t know for sure either way. I do think that the same people who wouldn’t vote for Clinton because she’s a woman, also wouldn’t vote for Warren.
I agree women have made serious efforts to run for the office in the past. I’m choosing to interpret “serious” in this case as “a candidate who had a reasonable chance of winning.” Either way it’s clear that misogyny has been a major (if theoretically surmountable) barrier for centuries.
Mostly because it slipped my mind. I guess it is a reason, but not sufficient, considering that she supports fracking, the TPP, DAPL, endless war, the War On Drugs, the death penalty (what the actual fuck?), opposes BLM, only supported gay marriage after 2013, will not at all regulate the banking industry, and only gives lip service to progressive causes. Voting for her because of women’s issues is like voting for Gary Johnson because of pot legalization.
I voted for her, but only because Trump/Pence is so much worse. I didn’t think that she would really do that much for anyone, I was just shit-scared that Trump/Pence would take away women’s rights, and everyone else’s rights.
Fantastic. So why the hell do you keep arguing with everyone who supports this article’s central thesis that misogyny played a key role shaping the election and was a major factor in Clinton’s loss?
True, it was a factor, but a minor one. She brought her loss on herself. It is probably less of a factor than the antisemitism, anti-leftist and anti-atheist bigotry that Sanders was facing, and preliminary polling shows that Sanders could have done better against Trump.
With margins so extremely close, there is a risk of settling on one determining factor at the expense of others. Misogyny in the electoral process has been real for quite a long time. But the determining factor why Clinton lost?
Clinton’s tone deaf campaign, poor messaging, campaign events, media strategy (or lack thereof), and failure to motivate the youth to vote for her ticket (http://boingboing.net/2017/01/07/registered-democrats-mostly-y.html) appear to be far bigger contributing factors. Also the worthlessness of the DNC as stated recently by Harry Reid who built his own campaign organization ground up in Nevada without DNC help.
The archaic electoral process, voting distributions, out of touch political system (clinton included) are way behind the public. Misogyny against Clinton was extra icing on a shit cake the established political left have been baking for three decades. Tying Clinton’s loss to broader social change is probably an overstatement because the upward trend for female empowerment continues to grow, especially through media and online discussion. The ugly stuff you see around the Trump campaign and online looks like what happens to ideas and mentalities before they die. Putting to much emphasis on one election, including all the asshole trolls getting people worked up could be an unnecessary distraction.
A thrice-married serial philanderer who bragged about committing sexual assault is seen as an acceptable candidate by nearly half the electorate and you think social acceptance of misogyny was a “minor” factor??
the problem is, we can’t know for sure how many people refused to vote for her because of misogyny, though. Because when asked, most people will probably give a variety of answers, and they’re probably going to be less likely to admit that they are just uncomfortable with a woman in that role.
I do have to say that I gets rather tiresome to have to continue to say that misogyny is a thing, and that I see it and have experienced it, and STILL have people say it is all in my head or not a major factor in my life. I’m not saying you’re doing that, but I’m just talking in general. It’s like there are people who think they know my reality better than me.
Thank you for saying this far better than I could. Misogyny is only one of the factors that helped Hillary lose the election, but it was a part of the clusterfuck (thanks @Melizmatic, that’s the best description of it.) If we deny or dismiss that, we do so at our peril. For “those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”
Again, though, I’m just getting sick of being told it’s not a factor we need to talk or think about. I don’t find misogyny to be an unnecessary distraction, but a factor in life that has a measurable effect on my life. It’s easy to dismiss it when it’s not a daily factor.
But clearly, our experiences and our view of these issues aren’t serious enough for some people involved in this discussion. Honestly, at this point in my life, it just makes me incredibly sad. For me, for you, and for the next generation of women.
People, I think (perhaps in error) we probably have a near consensus that:
Misogyny is a reality for women today
It affected the results of the election
It probably was not the difference between victory and defeat.
If I’m reading this right, the conversation (such as it is) is in theory much more about whether spending time and effort on the role of misogyny in the election is useful for producing better outcomes in future elections.
I think if we focus on that, we’re less likely to spend time attributing motivation and belief to other parties, which can be somewhat counterproductive when we may not even be in disagreement over the fundamental facts.
