« Return to Article

Member Comments

• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  bryony1 at 06/18/2008 1:47:41 AM
  Comment:
  I am very pleased to have read The Root today, because Salamishah Tillet finally gave me the term I've been trying to think of for several years, and that is: " 'a younger generation of 'post-feminist' women." " 'Post-feminist' women" is the term I've been racking my brains for.
  
  I'm sick and tired of hearing younger women repudiate feminism or say that it's no longer needed or, when they run into discrimination, wimpily start their protest with: "I'm not a feminist, but..." Well, why aren't they feminists? Sexism hasn't gone anywhere, any more than racism has. When I've countered with that wonderful, ringing statement: "We kicked down the doors you're walking through" (because in some cases this is true, or else Clinton wouldn't have been in the presidential race), they just snigger because they think anything they get is based entirely on their own merits. It's time they woke up, and maybe hearing the next president tell them will be the alarm clock they need. Ageism plays a role in that attitude, also, however, and our nation hasn't even begun to deal with the issues of older Americans ("seniors" be damned).
  
  By the way, any woman who supported Clinton and will now vote for McCain is going to have to turn in her feminist credentials because she'll be a hypocrite and a fraud. Maybe I'm an anomaly, but as an older feminist I've supported Obama from the beginning. I think he'll make a good president and set this country in a new direction, which I wouldn't trust Clinton to do, and not because she's a woman but because she's a typical politician, has been "in with the in-crowd" too long, and would accept too much of the status quo, regardless of what she's said. Does supporting the man and not the woman in this case make me anti-feminist? No -- it proves I'm no fool.
  
  As for Obama, let's hope indeed that he includes all women in addressing our issues; somebody's got to tell these younger women they have problems left to deal with, just like the rest of us, and anyone who says: "I'm not a feminist, but...." definitely has problems.
  
  
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  prspevack at 06/10/2008 2:33:37 PM
  Comment:
  When the presumed Presidental Candidate for the Green Party is confirmed in early July, Cynthia McKinney from Georgia who has more time and experience in the Congress than Obama and Hillary combined, will be able to fill both the race and feminist positions as Presidential Candidate.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  Darryl Cox at 06/09/2008 11:40:12 AM
  Comment:
  This entire piece should be regarded as political propaganda and part of a continuing disinformation program.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  diamondgirl9 at 06/08/2008 9:32:45 PM
  Comment:
  Obama states that Sen Clinton has made a change in the life of his 2 daughters is viewed as condescending? How?When Hillary said the first place nominee -Obama-could be the VP on her ticket,when she is clearly in 2nd place-that's condescention and arrogance.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  diamondgirl9 at 06/08/2008 9:27:10 PM
  Comment:
  So feminist think that Obama comments praising Hillary,and stating that his daughters world will be different because of her is condescending? How? I'll tell you what I think is condesending-To tell the first place candidate he can be the VP on her ticket.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  Senior from Arizona at 06/08/2008 5:07:21 PM
  Comment:
  The only thing wrong woth Obama is Obama. He condtradicts himself. He says he can no more disavow his pastor Wirhgt than his white grandmother. After Wright personally attacts him, he finds it quite easy to disavow Wright. For the record I am a senior whiter female Indeopent voter. I would not vote for Obama if he was a woman black or white. I would vote for Hillary if she was a black man, white man or black woman. This says it all. She is qualified, he is not.
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    diamondgirl9 at 06/08/2008 9:43:38 PM
    Comment:
    Rev.Wright publicly disavowed Obama,and did so in a most cruel and hearlless way.I don't think it was easy at all for Obama to separate himself from Wright. You only had to look at Obama's eyes to see how hurt he was. I'm sure he knew that the people who hold everything against him would not be satisified with his break with Wright.. He did it because he had to,and it was time to move on.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  2ndtimothyoneseven at 06/08/2008 12:15:07 AM
  Comment:
  To bring light to the pro-choice proclamaimation, let me just state that abortion is the absolute dream come true to men. First of all, the availabitlity of abortion on demand alleviates any responsibilty upon the male contributor of pregnancy. Any "feminism" who thinks that the termination of pregnancy is her choice is so sadly mistaken; you've only taken away the obligation of the one who did the impregnating. If you truly want a "choice", decide first who has the right to enter your body, and then, make damn sure that candidate has what it takes to act responsibly in the wake of the consequences of this God-given act. Sex outside of marriage most assuredly leads to pregrancy; or disease, and anyone who ends up with either has no right to interrupt what God has set forth as a consequence. Women need to make better "choices" before-hand.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  dickpeery at 06/08/2008 12:03:17 AM
  Comment:
  As a black male supporter of Obama, I think the best thing he could do would be to repudiate the appalling sexism that so many of his backers directed against Hillary Clinton. Commentators on television talk and comedy shows and in internet blogs felt free to define Clinton by her anatomy rather than simply stick to the flaws in her policy positions.
  It's not that Obamba's candidacy denied women a chance to have a president like them. The male Protestant Anglo-Saxon monopoly on the White House has existed since the founding of the country with the only exception being Catholic John Kennedy, who served just part of a term. Poles, Italians and everyone else has been just as excluded as white women and and African Americans. But if there is ever to be a social force strong enough to create better country, white feminists and blacks will have to be partners in it. Obama has a unique opportunity to lead us to new heights by helping his followers shed the shackles of the sexist past.
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    diamondgirl9 at 06/08/2008 9:50:17 PM
    Comment:
    How is the sexism in the media,and the political pundits Obama's fault? How are his supporters alleged sexism his fault.? I've seen sexism and racism in a lot of the blogs-but these people are just anomous posters,how can you blame him for that? Why would anyone base such an important vote on what some poster on a blog said?
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  blessinggirl at 06/07/2008 11:21:25 PM
  Comment:
  I simply do not understand why supporters of Senator Clinton believe she was slapped in the face or not taken seriously. As a black woman, I will tell you that the corporate work world is far more integrated with white women than with men or women of color. I am also confounded about the characterization of Senator Clinton as a feminist. Do you not understand the fear of a third Bill presidency--or the banana republicanism of a "Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton" presidential parade? It seems to me that the women who scream for Hillary the loudest are those who made personal choices to be humiliated and take it like she did. Finally, most folks consider themselves "pro-privacy" rather than pro-choice--including most Democrats. Where, oh where, is the beef?
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  rhmn at 06/07/2008 11:05:44 PM
  Comment:
  for those that believe that obama is not qualified or to green behind the ears, we have to remember that sen.clinton did ride to the senate on the coattails of her husbands presidency.not to negate or minimize anything that she stands for or has accomplished, but obama is a self made person that has accomplished what he has on his own and has run a very successful campaign on his own merits.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  POedinAZ at 06/07/2008 11:02:39 PM
  Comment:
  "To claim to be feminist and pro abortion is hypocritical "
  
  Boy, you are really confused!! Being pro CHOICE is to recognize that women have the right to control thier own reproductive lives. Abortion has been around for a long time. Roe v. Wade did not "create" abortions, it simply made them safe and legal. Thousand of womens' lives have been saved because of legal abortion, and many of those women were already mothers, or went on to bear children when they were ready. A recent MSN article pointed out that TODAY, the abortion rate is virtually the same in countries where it is illegal as in those where it is legal. The difference? Women die, families lose their loved one, and children are left motherless in the countries where it is illegal.
  
  And for those who have commented that Margaret Sanger was trying to eradicate the black race. Margaret Sanger fought for birth control for ALL women at a time when women had no option but to bear baby after baby until their bodies gave out and they died. Women were virtual slaves, "owned" by their husbands.
  
  The right to control one's reproduction is sacred. Women in this courty will never go back to letting men control their destinies. No one is forced to undergo an abortion in the US, nor to use birth control. Recognizing the right to choose based on one's OWN religious and/or personal beliefs is true feminism.
  "realfeminist" You aren't really a feminist at all. You do not believe that all women have the right to decide FOR THEMSELVES.
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    realfeminist22 at 06/08/2008 10:05:08 AM
    Comment:
    oh contrar I am not the least bit confused. I have spent years and years of my life doing research on the topic.
    Have you ever done any kind of post abortion counseling? If you have you would know that women have abortions because a man wants her to. THAT IS NOT controlling her own body, that's doing what a man, tells her to do. To say that abortion is your freedom is misinformed, it is just another way men control women. Also abortions maybe legal but surely aren???t safe. More women die from abortions than from child birth or child bearing, not to mention the evidence of cancer, sterility, pain, depression, and increased risks of STD???s. So your comment about women never letting men control their destinies is just rambling. So to say I am not a real feminist is just rambling as well. A feminist is someone who stands up and fights for all women. That???s what I???m doing because I know and so do you that women can do better than abortion. Abortion is not our liberation, it???s a set back.
    Now about Margaret Sanger, yes she did fight for birth control for all women. Her main goal was to exterminate African Americans. She was a firm believer in the KKK and often spoke at their meetings. Here are just two of her many evil quotes???
    
    From her book The Pivot of Civilization we know she had just those intentions by saying "organized attempts to help the poor were the 'surest sign that our civilization has bred, is breeding, and is perpetuating . . . defectives, delinquents, and dependents." She called for coercive sterilization, mandatory segregation, and rehabilitative concentration camps for all inferior blacks, Hispanics, poor whites and Catholics.
    
    In the "Negro Project" of 1939, for example, Sanger encouraged black ministers to propagate the pill in their own communities-in essence, to unknowingly wipe out their own people. She is quoted as saying, "The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the Minister is the man who can straighten out the idea if it ever occurs to any of their rebellious members."
    
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  cdrgran at 06/07/2008 11:01:24 PM
  Comment:
  I still don't know what "change" we are expecting to happen. Am old enough to know Camelot was for a time there but it had holes in it. Also spent over 40 years as a working worman and can tell you the hair on the back of my neck stood up to hear "sweetie" then explanation of I say that often, Change that.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  lgreen23 at 06/07/2008 8:23:25 PM
  Comment:
  That's the PROBLEM! Yes, Obama is about change, and I strongly believe that he will change somethings. However, he want be able to do it in the twinkling of an eye, he is not GOD! Yes, we all have issues that we think are most important and should be placed in the forefront. However, giving immigrants legal residency is not something I feel should be of primary interest.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  flhers at 06/07/2008 8:01:08 PM
  Comment:
  I have just one question to Senator B. Obama.
  Immigrants who have more than 15 years in the country, paying taxes, using only work permit..... and those who believed in president Bush promesses to give them legal documents ( residency ) in the US. What do you planning to do for those people who have they family voting for you?
  You says...ITS TIME FOR CHANGE..... The US dollar says..." IN GOD WE TRUST"
  Now I say...." IN YOU WE TRUST FOR THIS CHANGE"
  
  Herve M. Sanchez Martinez
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  robikris at 06/07/2008 7:29:04 PM
  Comment:
  I have never found Hillary a positive role model for women. Her acceptance of the sexual dalliances (most likely addiction) of Bill Cliniton and showing up with Bill and Magic Johnson at one of her first campaign trysts is an insult to women who have been subjigated and abused by men. The only time Hillary discussed her decision to stay with Bill was on the Tyra Banks show and her answer was "it worked for me". Well, it does not work for the majority of women who have known and experienced gender oppression.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  marykick at 06/07/2008 6:19:18 PM
  Comment:
  In response to realfeminist:: Wow! You must be relly close to Mrs. Clinton to have that ibside2 info about her marriage. The only people who can answer the question as to why Clinton stayed is her and her husband. I dont think it furthers any serious discussion to critize her on this issue.
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    realfeminist22 at 06/07/2008 6:40:51 PM
    Comment:
    true I may not know her personally but I do know how to read and interpret a biography.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  realfeminist22 at 06/07/2008 4:59:38 PM
  Comment:
  I love the take on abortion and racism in this article. You see you criticize McCain for being pro-life but yet care less that abortion was started as a means to exterminate the African American race(don't believe me, read just one of Margret Sangers, the founder of Planned Parenthood, book). How can you dare sit there and say you agree with Obama on this issue? Not to mention how sex based abortions affect the number of future feminists. I am so disgusted by how hypocritical you fake feminists democrats are.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  lpelikan at 06/07/2008 3:26:19 PM
  Comment:
  I agree that Senator Obama must find a way to extend a gracious hand to Senator Clintor and help heal the pain that women are feeling right now.
  
  
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  cakreator at 06/07/2008 3:19:37 PM
  Comment:
  For a lot of us "older women," the primary factor in NOT voting for Hillary Clinton is the fact the she has demonstrated that she is a liar. That and the fact that her sudden move to New York at the end of her husband's career as President was clearly a bid, a first step, for the presidency. It is understandable that the Clintons didn't want to return to Arkansas, considering Bill's less than exemplary behavior while in office. It is much less understandable that they didn't return to Illinois, with which Hillary has more historic ties.
  
  I am so disillusioned with politicians, at this point, that if a candidate was presented who had credentials in honesty and upright character and good moral and ethical behavior, but no prior legal or political experience, I would be sorely tempted to vote for that candidate, regardless of race, sex, or ethnicity. Politicians too easily bend to the whims of those businessmen who can provide them with funds for their re-election campaigns. The result has been that CEOs and CFOs make rediculous salaries while the rest of us are poorly paid and too often lose jobs to third world countries, and need to be fluent in Hindi or Pakistani languages to get assistance with defective products built with dangerous parts in China. In the end, I don't believe the survival of the American people will depend on race or sex, but rather on who will stand up to big business and put an end to selling off the rights to American resources to foreign businesses.
  
  So which candidate is more likely to cease selling American resources to foreign countries? Who is more likely to nationalize the oil fields and coal fields? Is anyone else but me concerned about the fact that the deeds for most houses reserve the rights for any minerals found under the land, or the fact that underground fires and collapses have deprived people of their homes with little or no compansation from the government who deprives us of those rights?
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  ddf04 at 06/07/2008 3:07:17 PM
  Comment:
  Nice article Salamishah! Go Obama!
  Dale Fairclough
  Penn '96
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  Anna Mae at 06/07/2008 12:58:52 AM
  Comment:
  I am tired of these damsels in distress accusing Obama and practically everyone else of sexism in the race. Had Obama and his surrogates used race in this way, he would not be the presumptive nominee. http://theladnerreportblog.blogspot.com
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  mruth at 06/06/2008 3:51:25 PM
  Comment:
  Last night Jon Stewart's The Daily Show ran a montage of stupid sexist things the white guys on news shows said about Hillary. It makes you want to smack them no matter which candidate you supported. I don't think Obama did anything he has to apologize for, but it would go a long way to acknowledge the idiocy of those sexist statements and the bullying that male commentators felt free to engage in. I personally do not believe it explains why Hillary lost, but I do think it explains why Hillary's supporters are angry.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  supag32 at 06/06/2008 3:45:49 PM
  Comment:
  In general, I don???t agree with the author's premise, which is that there are substantive issues on which Obama fails to appeal to Women. The controversies she lists are very thin examples of a ???problem??? that I don???t think even exists. Come on, Women support Hillary over Barack because he called some random Woman ???Sweetie??? or because he made some vague condescending remark about her candidacy (which I don???t even understand what???s wrong with)? It???s obvious that the only problem he has is that he is a Man, and he???s standing in the way of a Woman???s progress. Period (unless you want to get into discussions of racism as well). So basically, I???m saying that he has no reason to address Women???s issues what so ever. He???s not soft on these issues. He???s just not a Woman. He???s just not White. All the speechifying in the world is not going to change that.
  
  Women do not support Hillary over Barack because he has a weak record on issues that matter to Women, or has demonstrated a lack of sensitivity toward gender issues throughout the campaign. They support her disproportionately because she is a Woman. It's identity politics, which I'm not saying is unreasonable. Just don't pretend that it is based on substance. It is not.
  
  It???s the same thing with the whole working class thing. If anything, his cultural style and his policies are more friendly to working class people than Hillary???s. He doesn???t need to ???figure out how to appeal to working class people better.??? That assumes there is some rational reason why they don???t support him. I just don???t buy that.
  
  Furthermore, the Presidential nomination is not some computer algorithm, where you punch in the candidates relative qualifications and experience, and the one with the most wins the job. That's not how it works. It's about performance and the proper execution of a strategy that works, and talent. This glib notion that Women see HIllary as a more qualified candidate that got passed over by a younger, less experienced Man is just nonsense. Nobody passed over Hillary, she was out-competed by her challenger and lost. There was not single decision point where someone took it away from her and handed it to him. This is not Donald Trump's Apprentice. The analogy is all wrong.
  
  
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  supag32 at 06/06/2008 3:45:21 PM
  Comment:
  In general, I don???t agree with the author's premise, which is that there are substantive issues on which Obama fails to appeal to Women. The controversies she lists are very thin examples of a ???problem??? that I don???t think even exists. Come on, Women support Hillary over Barack because he called some random Woman ???Sweetie??? or because he made some vague condescending remark about her candidacy (which I don???t even understand what???s wrong with)? It???s obvious that the only problem he has is that he is a Man, and he???s standing in the way of a Woman???s progress. Period (unless you want to get into discussions of racism as well). So basically, I???m saying that he has no reason to address Women???s issues what so ever. He???s not soft on these issues. He???s just not a Woman. He???s just not White. All the speechifying in the world is not going to change that.
  
  Women do not support Hillary over Barack because he has a weak record on issues that matter to Women, or has demonstrated a lack of sensitivity toward gender issues throughout the campaign. They support her disproportionately because she is a Woman. It's identity politics, which I'm not saying is unreasonable. Just don't pretend that it is based on substance. It is not.
  
  It???s the same thing with the whole working class thing. If anything, his cultural style and his policies are more friendly to working class people than Hillary???s. He doesn???t need to ???figure out how to appeal to working class people better.??? That assumes there is some rational reason why they don???t support him. I just don???t buy that.
  
  Furthermore, the Presidential nomination is not some computer algorithm, where you punch in the candidates relative qualifications and experience, and the one with the most wins the job. That's not how it works. It's about performance and the proper execution of a strategy that works, and talent. This glib notion that Women see HIllary as a more qualified candidate that got passed over by a younger, less experienced Man is just nonsense. Nobody passed over Hillary, she was out-competed by her challenger and lost. There was not single decision point where someone took it away from her and handed it to him. This is not Donald Trump's Apprentice. The analogy is all wrong.
  
  SDH
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  footloose5150 at 06/06/2008 3:17:11 PM
  Comment:
  Let's see black men could vote almost a half a century before any woman could vote! I was raised to look at the person, not the color, and that is how I raised my own kids. But until this primary, I have become very conscious of race! Hillery won all the states she needed...Why is Florida always the one to mess everything up. Once again the people spoke, and the wrong man is running...punish the candidate who suggested the early vote..who? Obama! Fla. Bush Gov=Rep. Hillery wins! Take thos delegates away from Hillery.=Obama up on delegates..Put Obama in the race guarentees McCain, a better shot. McCain wouldn't beat Hillery, but he sure as hell can beat Obama! I am 58 years old, voted Democrat all my life, till now! I along with many, will switch party lines. Hillery has to endorse her own party publicly, but I will bet you, she won't vote for him either. I really believe we needed Hillery! I believe our country is in trouble. Everyone hates us, and if they don't it's because we buy them. Noone thought Hillery had a chance in NY, but she prevailed, and has done a great job. NY has suffered much sinse 9/11, and a timewhere politicians had to step up, and she was always in it. Not that am big on politics, but I personally never heard of Obama prior to the primaries, but Hillery has been on our tounges, aside from Bill's wife, for her own accomplishments. All this is a stratgedy to put McCain in office, I believe, and it worked, as the best shot at the white house for Dems, was Hillery, and we just handed the presidentcy to Senator McCain, not because I am a sore loser, but because I am aware of McCain, and his accomplishments, and his name doesn't sound like OSama. Just kidding about the Osama part. It is as though there is a giant stradegy by Republicans to get there man in. I have never felt so dissapointed. Does the peoples vote ever mean anything?
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    straight at 06/06/2008 5:36:07 PM
    Comment:
    i'm a woman and i don't believe that there was any REAL evidence of sexism in this election...hillary(and people like you) just want to blame their loss to a black guy on the rest of the non-female world. be honest...you all thought that hillary was sure to win once she was going up against the black guy and it so turned out that people prefer him to her because she's such a liar and because he represents real change that hillary would not be capable of bringing about. sexism is for old people...young people know that there aren't any real restrictions if you're a female in this day and age....get over the past. obviously you are gonna try to tell me to take my own advise when it concerns racism but guess what?...racism is still very prominent. i believe that people like you would never have voted for him anyway...and you're sexist just for claiming that she lost because of sexism! you old people are so lame!
    oh and by the way she didn't lose because she's a woman, she lost because its SHE'S HILLARY CLINTON!
    • • Reply
      • Report Abuse
      Posted By:
      Senior from Arizona at 06/08/2008 5:17:09 PM
      Comment:
      I say again I would not vote fopr Obama if he was a white man, a white woman or a black woman. I would vote for Hillary if shw was a white man, a black man or a black woman. Race and sex has nothing to do with the qualifications of the nominee. In a few years Obama might be qualified.
    • • Reply
      • Report Abuse
      Posted By:
      lidarose at 06/07/2008 8:11:15 PM
      Comment:
      OK, it would appear that you are a "young person." Well, friend, I'm here to tell you that "old people" are a lot less "lame" than you appear to be. I'm a 70-year-old white female who used to support both the Clintons up until it became obviious the manner in which her campaign was being run. I have lost respect for the both of them, and one would hope that they will retire gracefully from the political scene, which of course, is not likely to happen. Her loss has nothing to do with sexism, racism, or the like, but rather with a loss of dignity and the blatant pandering to whomever would listen and be wooed, and the undeniable desire for power, no matter whet the cost. P.S. We "old people" also know how to construct complete sentences and use punctuation and capitalization properly.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  rhmn at 06/06/2008 1:55:59 PM
  Comment:
  It is interesting to me that the women who state that they will now vote for Mccain , dont see or wont see that both of these historic campaigns have had to deal with many of americas systemic issues,i.e sexism and racism.why not vote for your interests?a spite vote seems to undermine the value of your voice, if you love hillary and her politics then you should at least like obama's, he and sen.clintons are very similar and they both are miles apart from mccain and his values.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  dbarabin at 06/06/2008 1:29:53 PM
  Comment:
  Why not vote your interests? A conitnuation or worsening of the government under Republicans will not aid your everyday life in a positive manner.
  
  Senator Obama has the right to choose his running mate based on his needs and should he not choose Senator Clinton he still will be a much better choice for President than Senator McCain.
  
  I do not understand not voting your interests. It makes no sense to me.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  xyz123 at 06/06/2008 12:52:24 PM
  Comment:
  When women tell me to vote for HIlary Clinton because it is the right thing to do -- to advance women's cause. Doing so otherwise would jeopardize the advancement of women into the political arena. I tend to disagree with such visceral argument because liberations for women mean the ability for women to vote for whoever they see fit not because of their gender. Gender voting is simply anathema to feminism and simply promotes reverse sexism.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  Samantha T at 06/06/2008 11:11:34 AM
  Comment:
  "If Senator Clinton would have won a lot of African-Americans would be expressing the same feelings."
  
  Amen. This very blog had an article about Democrats taking the black vote for granted and many posters articulated their (insane, illogical, and completely selfish) plan of either voting McCain or abstaining in November. I'm a HRC supporter who will support Obama in the fall. I'm disappointed my candidate isn't the nominee, but I'm not going to put more soldiers, the Supreme Court, our economy, the working poor, and universal healthcare at risk. HRC wouldn't want me to.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  juliasantiago at 06/06/2008 9:04:26 AM
  Comment:
  I voted for Hillary not because I could not support Obama, but because I wanted to make a statement for women. In my eyes, they were both formidable candidates. As someone who worked on Jesse Jackson's campaign in the Latino Community (Latinos para Jesse) it was a hard choice; I made my choice nevertheless. Now that Hillary is not the nominee (18 million supporters can hardly be considered a bad showing) I wholeheartedly support, will campaign and make a financial contribution for Obama as President of the US. History has been made, he will be the President for all Americans. Let's stop pigeon holing him as the black or the non woman candidate. How is his comment about his daughters condescending. I found it admirable, had he not said anything he would have been accused of being dismissive. Sweetie, o.k. perhaps it was a bad choice of term, but common who amongst us has not made a bad choice. He is only human. A great human being at that...by Julia Santiago
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  delta at 06/06/2008 8:51:54 AM
  Comment:
  It's quite interesting to see how many expect Senator Obama to be all things to all people; yet no one else is held to this standard. Senator Clinton had a huge opportunity during her campaign to actively recruit and include a wide number of feminists and womanists of all backgrounds. It is impossible for this observer to believe that had she done so, based of the number of women among the electorate, she would be the clear winner. What galls me most, is that Clinton WAS accepted as a woman; moreover, she was able to affirm her womanhood in her own voice. Clinton was NEVER called upon to transcend gender as though it were a curse, yet Obama continues to be expected to transcend his color as though it is something to be ashamed of. We all need to take time to think through what we have observed, what we have learned, and how we can move forward in the interest of our Nation. They eyes of the entire world are on us. Let's make ourselves proud.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  Monroe Eskew at 06/06/2008 5:25:24 AM
  Comment:
  Wow, some ridiculous claims. How in the world is his comment on Hillary shattering myths in any condescending??? The idea that non-Hillary supporters are "post-feminist" is a giant insult to feminism. I think Hillary would have more to answer for with her "cajones" schtick, which was the most sexist thing to occur the whole campaign.
  
  All Obama needs to do is talk about the the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. That alone will destroy McCain. I can't see how even Ann Coulter could support McCain on that one.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  angie111 at 06/06/2008 3:37:53 AM
  Comment:
  If there are actually women out there who think that the statement that Hillary Clinton had "shattered myths and broken barriers and changed the America in which my daughters and yours will come of age" is a condescending thing to say, then there is no way to win over these women. If a compliment is taken as an insult, then I don't think Obama should waste his time trying to have a mature discussion with these women. It's sad to me that there are women that cynical out there.
  
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  Alazart at 06/06/2008 2:19:53 AM
  Comment:
  I think this issue is an important issue for Barack Obama's bid for the White House. But I must admit that I agree that if these women vote for McCain just because Obama took the nomination away from Hillary, or just because they don't know him enough, which I think is a lame excuse to not support him come November, will end up voting for a person who is against what women stand for. I believe Obama has enough time to attract women off all color to come around no matter what Hillary supporters threaten to do so. God Bless America. God Bless Obama.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  manhatta at 06/06/2008 1:50:14 AM
  Comment:
  This article seems to me to assume that the only reason why anyone would vote McCain over Obama is a kind of old feminist loser spite. (And may I say that I know 40 year old men who are Hillary supporters.) What about those of us who are worried about economic issues in this country as well as the war and think Senator Obama is talented but so inexperienced it's frightening. To which worries the press says 'oh well he'll get good advisors.' The issue isn't good advise, it's having the experience to recognize good advise when you hear it, and then knowing how to implement it. Oh well, the guy has to practice somewhere., why not in the White House.
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    diamondgirl9 at 06/08/2008 11:15:16 PM
    Comment:
    If you are worried about economic issues-why would you trust Clinton over Obama. She couldn't even manage her campaign budget-she is about 20 million dollars in debt. As far as experience,she is the junior senator from NY,he is the junior senator from Ill.Surely you are not equating her being the wife of the ex-president experience. I used to stay in the kitchen with my mother,watching and helping her cook for years. She was an excellent cook. I still can't cook .
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  kfreeman85 at 06/05/2008 11:52:49 PM
  Comment:
  It's definitely an important question. Charlie Rose attempted to broach it last night on his show.
  
  I think Obama is nothing short of exquisite in the way he's handled this campaign thus far He is not perfect, but he's damn good.
  
  I trust that he will graciously address the concerns of women voters. I would be dumbfounded amazed and excited if he made a speech on sexism (not gender, as gender is much more complex that our heterosexist society is yet able to comprehend).
  
  But I think it's an unfortunate double standard to hold him to. And I'm inclined to think that it wouldn't have been as big of a deal for Hillary to make amends with black folks had she gotten the nomination.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  roadkill1965 at 06/05/2008 11:38:14 PM
  Comment:
  Yes, there certainly is a gender gap. Over 90% of prisoners, workplace fatalities, and homeless people are men, while less than 10% are awarded primary custody in a divorce. Why is it we never hear complaints about those statistics from women? Unfortunately, it's BIOLOGICAL. Men make up the majority at both extremes - top and bottom. Women are more cautious, in general, and are closer to the median. I get so tired of the "sexism" charge thrown around for the few circumstances in life that benefit men more than women.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  eslater at 06/05/2008 11:31:16 PM
  Comment:
  Hillary's female supports will run to Obama once they learn how "pro-life" John McCain truly is.
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    realfeminist22 at 06/07/2008 5:29:08 PM
    Comment:
    statistics show that 77% of the pro abortion are men. 100% of them will never be pregnant. To claim to be feminist and pro abortion is hypocritical
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    cmcdonald2003 at 06/06/2008 12:45:30 AM
    Comment:
    Here I must share this is an incorrect and dangerous assumption for Obama Dems to stand upon at this early juncture pre-November. I'm a long time female Dem in Texas as well as an election judge. I have many women Dem friends/election judges too who have already recently in a meeting voiced they will not vote for Obama if Hillary is not on the ticket -- unless he provides evidence to them he can actually do the job they feel he needs to do for them. They won't be fooled by another line of glib words such as Bush has given us in this country. As of May, they were planning to swing behind McCain come November because they know McCain and they don't know who Obama is or what he has done or what he will do. Obama will lose huge blocks of voters unless he can convince them otherwise by November.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  warrior dowager at 06/05/2008 10:45:13 PM
  Comment:
  Women on Hillar's side are far more mature,informed, and generally in touch with politics of their past 20 to 40 years. Vision? Change? been there done that yearly since they graduated Smith or Duke. Only their belief in pro choice
  as opposed to the GOP, and other common causes may save the day for Obama, but it is just as likey that women will feel it incumbent upon themself to stay away from the polls or vote GOP. This is stone cold serious. The female winner was destroyed by an Nancy Pilosi determed to take over the power the Clintons had been such a good steward of.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  FoxyScholar at 06/05/2008 10:20:41 PM
  Comment:
  So is it implied that this (mainly) WHITE women? Sigh.... Please take a watch/listen to this "robust" conversation:
  
  http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/1...ntial_politics
  Race and Gender in Presidential Politics: A Debate Between Gloria Steinem and Melissa Harris-Lacewell
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  matcostanzo at 06/05/2008 10:20:38 PM
  Comment:
  remember that the gender gap has existed as longs as western society, meaning for thousands of years. In the past 100 years women have made more strides than earlier women could have imagined. It's a process and it's happening about as fast as things can from a sociological standpoint. Like myself, a 30 year old white man, I think Barak Obama has so much natural respect for women (I've never in my life thought myself better than women, my mother is a respected doctor and my sister is my best friend) that I really think his views on women is a non-issue. I imagine that if pressed he would say what I would "Women are people, we're all people. It's the Old Guard that's holding things back. I'm with you." Please cut him a break.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  no woman no cry at 06/05/2008 9:52:13 PM
  Comment:
  Sexism and Racism constitute the premise upon which the democratic ideals of this country were built. Yet women continue to wane for the opportunity for self validation by fighting for recognition by our male counterparts. The power and wisdom that a woman embodies do not require validation from a man. Those who supported Hillary may have been so lost in the political foray that they failed to recognize a dangerously uncontrollable desire of Hillary Clinton, to be accepted as one of the boys: even her attire emulates that of the masculine gender. However, the red flag was raised when she cocked a beer bottle to her ???womanly??? lips in Puerto Rico like and guzzled a shot of whiskey followed by a beer chaser while on a campaign stop here on the mainland. I was convinced that this was not the image I wanted my President to portray. I have never seen nor heard of any presidential candidate (man or woman) vying for one of the highest positions in the world displaying such passive drunkenness. If any of us believe that this woman was going to lead us to the water springs to slake our thirst then we have truly lost vision of our own humanity. As a woman of color, I am taking the liberty to say that one of our weaknesses is that we are always looking for a savior. This woman has never given any promises to anyone that she has the same goals and aspirations as the average woman in America or even the world. We have become a generation of ???gazers???; always looking in the far distance for someone to lift us out of the dirt of our own making. We need to come alive and see that our role as women is far greater than being president of any country. Until we start to govern our families, guide our children, subduing our personal demons???how can we ever be taken seriously? We can begin by exposing our children to the truth; addressing issues such as bigotry and maltreatment of the original owners/natives of this land. We can teach them tolerance by taking our children to visit refugee camps, reservations, and neighborhoods where people of different cultures reside. Then we will realize that the recognition and victory that we have yearned throughout our lives have always been at our feet; held in the hands of our children. We can conquer the world by creating our vision through their eyes.
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    HCSCTgirl at 06/06/2008 12:26:51 PM
    Comment:
    Are you kidding me? I'm sorry that Hillary Clinton does not conform to your "ideal" of feminism. I'm sorry that drinking beer, taking shots, and wearing pant-suits is not feminine enough for you. "Governing our families, guiding our children" is not the highest call for women, and we SHOULD strive to be presidents of all coutnries. This is the reason that I support Clinton: she pushes women to strive for more than families and children. She has those things, but knows she can do more. And not only should we teach our nation's children about bigotry, but about sexism and the way in which it is as entrenched in our society as racism, possibly even more. I for one is not looking for a "savior" like so many Obama supporters are; I am looking ofr an experienced leader who will break one of the biggest glass ceilings there are and inspire a huge segment of the population to get out of the homes and daycares and reach for positions of power.
    • • Reply
      • Report Abuse
      Posted By:
      realfeminist22 at 06/07/2008 5:59:32 PM
      Comment:
      Hillary Clinton is a liar! Also she is not an influence to real feminists. You claim she inspires us to get out of our homes and daycares and blah blah blah......Ever wonder why Hillary stayed with a cheating man? She stayed with him because she thought she needed a man to get this far. Wow a "feminist"(she's not a real one by the way only pro life women are true feminists) needing a man to get into office, and that's who you want as a leader?
      • • Reply
        • Report Abuse
        Posted By:
        HCSCTgirl at 06/12/2008 12:01:28 PM
        Comment:
        Wow, I had no idea that you were so close to Hillary Clinton. You must be to say for certain that the reason that she stayed with her husband was because of political power. Get out of her bedroom. Women stay with cheating men for a myriad of reasons, two of possibly the most important being love and shared children. Her personal dealings with her husband have no bearing on my vote, just as I don't think Kennedy was a horrible man because he cheated. And I seriously can't even respond to your belief that the only true feminists are those that are pro-life because that is absurd. Hilarious. I don't even know why I'm responding to someone who is so off their rocker.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  mruth at 06/05/2008 8:48:57 PM
  Comment:
  This is the only website where people seem to talk about combustible topics without assuming the worst about each other. I hope it stays that way. I am a strong Obama supporter and am very happy, but I want to give Hillary supporters the consideration I would have needed if Obama lost. Namely, some time to grieve.
  I am white and 44 years old. I have experienced sexual discrimination and petty harassment on the job (like being cut out of the weekly all-male poker game with the boss). It was infuriating to see the most junior male newcomer on staff included in the "fast-track" events that the women were excluded from. My experience pales next to the daily denigration and discrimination experienced by women older than I am. In the last 3 months of the campaign, Hillary figured things out and skillfully appealed to resentment over this treatment, and I totally understand why there are women who feel her political defeat to be their own personal one. As time goes on, I think they will feel less and less that it had anything to do with Obama specifically, and much more to do with years and years of disrespect.
  I think it would be good to remember that there are other women coming along. Among them are female combat veterans from the Persian Gulf Wars and Afghanistan. There is female talent in the schools, in business, in the military, in community organizing, that we don't even know about yet. But they will move into Congress, the courts, and the White House, and change things. Hillary ran hard and lost but she is not the end of the line.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  b/ceagle at 06/05/2008 8:11:37 PM
  Comment:
  The statistics of female representation in America are truly depressing; however, I would ask for statistics showing a favoritism towards men in actual elections --ie, how many times qualified (or, for that matter, under-qualified) men were favored over comparably qualified women in state or federal elections--before I considered your statistics as indicative of some unjust preference for men in office. I can't deny that women are a minority in American government at all levels--I'm just not sure what that means. It could simply mean that men are more likely to run for office in America...
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  Kasavubu at 06/05/2008 8:10:29 PM
  Comment:
  The next time Salamishah Tillet feels like ranting about sexism, she should consider this: Between 1979 and 2005, according to the U.S. Census, the median income of white women in the United States increased 30 per cent in real terms (constant dollars). The median income of black women has increased nearly 20% in real terms in the same period. The median real income of white men has not increased at all in real terms, and the median income of black men has actually decreased slightly in real terms. For Hispanic men, there has been a 10% decline. Median income for white women is now higher than for black men, and the gap is likely to grow rapidly in coming decades because of current college enrollment and graduation trends. Female domination of the teaching profession is turning schools into a hostile environment for males, and the U.S. is literally an emerging matriarchy.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  cmcdonald2003 at 06/05/2008 8:00:10 PM
  Comment:
  Khathu's comments ring true. Let's be real. Obama has no positive history dealing with women/gender, and we should truly question whether he ever will (with whatever job he holds from here on out). Moving from the executive to the judicial, with Kathu's comment I also think of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his actions toward women (Anita Hill and into present day with his rulings).
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  lucy23 at 06/05/2008 7:11:34 PM
  Comment:
  I think many women will support Obamba, but many "older "women will just say enough. Abortion rights no longer effect them, equal pay is for the next generation to complete. The old men on the Supreme can say little that effects the lives of older women, they long ago tuned out old men.
  Imagine what would have happened to Hillary if she had said "Blacks are just clinging to guns and religion?. Imagine what would have happened to Hillary if she attended a church for twenty years that did something other than sing hymns and pray?. Imagine what the pundit on Anderson Cooper's CNN show last night would be doing for a living today if he had called Obamba "deranged". Older woman are upset at the hours cable networks spent using Hillary as a ratings tool. Older women are disgusted after watching the women they fought so hard for act like complete idiots who could not give one reflection on women and the fight women fought for their equal rights.
  
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  mary kate at 06/05/2008 6:36:33 PM
  Comment:
  This is the first time I have visited this site, and I have to say that I'm really glad I clicked on the link that brought me here. People talking about the highly fraught issues of race and gender without screaming at each other in ALL-CAPs? I'm impressed!
  
  As a white woman and a Clinton supporter, I am disappointed that my candidate did not get the nomination. I'm also angered by the misogyny that came from some elements of the media and also, sadly, from some (though not all, and probably not most) of Obama's supporters. But there's no way I'm going to support McCain, and I am slowly (well, it's been two days right? so please give me, and other Clinton supporters, a bit of time...) coming around to supporting Obama.
  
  I do think Obama has some things to learn about speaking of and to women (no more "sweetie", please!); I also believe he's a quick study and is willing to learn. And for all that he has to make some improvements in this area, he's still already light-years ahead of McCain, who couldn't give a hoot about women and never has and never will.
  
  I also think it's a bit unfortunate that we had to have these two "firsts" (first African American, first woman) running against each other at the same time (though it's a bit much to see GOP pundits gloating over the "disunity" of the Democrats: yeah, they're more united, I guess, since they all seem to agree they can only select older white men). To the extent that the nomination was about choosing "the first" (whether first African American or first woman), it set up a competition between two historically marginalized and under-represented groups, and that kind of contest is pretty much a mug's game. Had Clinton won instead of Obama (and it was a very tight race, after all), there would no doubt have been anger and disappointment on the part of some Obama supporters who had hoped to finally see a black presidential nominee, and understandably so. Of course, at this point in time (it's 2008, after all), we should be well beyond the "historic first" phase for both women and African-Americans, but, well, we're not. And if we can't have both at one time (e.g., an African-American female candidate!), it's still a good thing to have at least one of them, and a hundred times better than having a GOP president in the White House for another 4 to 8 years. So, while I am not going to be talked out of my anger over the misogyny (yeah, I'm looking at YOU, Chris Matthews, and you're no longer on my Christmas card list...), I am getting over my disappointment at Clinton's loss, and am even beginning to feel some excitement about the Democrats running this historic first candidate.
  
  Mary Kate
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  Corbettpc at 06/05/2008 6:32:26 PM
  Comment:
  I believe Hillary Clinton did herself in -- she NEVER apologized for her vote for the war; she misplayed the caucuses; she was caught in several overt lies; she changed the rules every time she was in a bind; her gas tax holiday was laughable; and now she is stealing the spotlight from the genuine winner of the campaign. A former champion of Mrs. Clinton, I am now thoroughly disgusted with her behavior.
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    Senior from Arizona at 06/08/2008 5:22:18 PM
    Comment:
    She is constantly critized for her vote on the war. Obama was not even in the Senate. He did not vote for or against the war. He was not a Senatore. How can he critize her.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  glasses at 06/05/2008 6:27:58 PM
  Comment:
  I'm so sick of women saying the phrase "I wouldn't vote based on gender." Why? That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. OWN IT LADIES! Vote based on gender! Men do! If you don't, you're tragic fools who are so mired in the patriarchy that you don't even realize what you're doing.
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    HCSCTgirl at 06/06/2008 12:35:44 PM
    Comment:
    Ahem! I am so tired of people saying that gender should not be an important factor. As a young woman, I am aware of the importance (and disadvantage) of my gender every day. We can not work to change sexism and patriarchy until women realize it exists!
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  marykick at 06/05/2008 6:17:39 PM
  Comment:
  As a former Hillary supporter and a current Obama supporter I have a suggestion. All of the women who supported Hillary just need to be left alone for a month or so. No, hard core campaigning, etc. I'm really bummed over losing the chance to have a female president. I need a couple weeks to digest all of this before I'm ready to go rah rah over Obama. Is that too much to ask? I believe thaty most of Hillary supporters will come around.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  Thoughtful Soul at 06/05/2008 6:01:38 PM
  Comment:
  Oh, by-the-way, it is nice to see an international candidate, Obama, a Kenyan-American, being elected as the Democratic nominee. Does that mean that in the future, we shall have more international presidential candidates? This is SUPER-COOL!!! When one considers that Obama's Dad was not even a USA resident............this is SWEET. Let the foreigners get a chance to rule too!! Why not, tis might improve USA's international rifts.
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    haasie at 06/08/2008 6:50:40 PM
    Comment:
    Obama is American, as all Presidents are required to be by the U.S. Constitution. Let's keep the discussion intelligent.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  Thoughtful Soul at 06/05/2008 5:48:39 PM
  Comment:
  Obama needs to select MICHELLE OBAMA as his running mate for the VP position. That way, women will see a positive image and vote for him. He also needs to assure women of more positive changes coming, if he were elected to UPLIFT WOMEN. Make no bones, women are still treated VERY UNFAIRLY in this world! I am a woman, and life has been ROUGH!!! The HUGE INSURMOUNTABLE BARRIERS in this world against women, should not be ignored!!! Hilary Clinton was SEVERELY DIS-RESPECTED, ABUSED, etc. about a-million-fold when compared to Barrack Obama. The only little problem with Barrack, is that he is not a pure-white person. But he is a MAN!!! Don't get me wrong, I cheer Barrack for winning the nomination, but, I would have been far more elated for him, if Clinton was NOT so SORELY ABUSED by the public, who loathe seeing a woman in a top leadership position. So, Barrack, take some wise advice and elect your wife Michelle as your running mate. Ths will assure women of your willingness to begin respecting them. As for Hillary, I very strongly congratulate her on such a STRONG SHOWING in the face of the world's predjudice against women as leaders. I hope that she will take some time off, lay low, and let the chips fall where they will in November 2008. Hilary should NOT TRY TO BE BARRACK'S RUNNING MATE. She just lost to him, in a gruelling marathon. Poeple will think she is trying to undermine him, the closer she gets to him. If he loses the November election, she must have NO PART to bear in it. I do hope to someday see Michelle Obama, and Hillary Clinton become USA Presidents. They are bright, dignified, and very capable women-leaders. After-all, the USA has NEVER had a female president. Now, that would be a REAL CHANGE, and very WELCOME. All things considered, all USA presidents elect, go into office with BIG promises. Everyone does some GOOD things, and makes some MISTAKES. Women would do NO WORSE than Men have done if given chances to serve as USA Presidents.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  CityzenJane at 06/05/2008 5:38:27 PM
  Comment:
  I know they exist, the Harriet Christians of the world...but I wonder why they are highlighted at this moment by the mainstream media. It's not as if I - a white 44 year old woman have anything to gain by a McCain victory - But the media choses Harriet to represent me? I have been an Obama supporter from the get go. But the media chooses a gold laden upper east sider to represent a huge cohort. Sure some of these ladies are pissed, but why is their voice so much louder than voices like mine - at the moment?
  Does Obama need to go deeper on gender SURE! He needs to do that on a whole host of issues! Did it bother me that he used the term 'sweetie'...I use it all the time - to men and women of all shades - mountain/molehill....
  All the Harriets of the world would do well to remember that McCain called his wife a *** in front of a room full of reporters, and that she made him an extremely well to do man - with 8 homes no less.
  Obama 08-12!
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  cmjardine at 06/05/2008 5:17:15 PM
  Comment:
  Great article.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  cmjardine at 06/05/2008 5:15:41 PM
  Comment:
  Good article.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  faroutdc at 06/05/2008 5:02:05 PM
  Comment:
  Interesting. There is still a woman running for President and I don't see her name mentioned in the article or even in this thread (I may have missed it). Cynthia McKinney is running as the Green Party candidate. I say this not as an endorsement but to ask politically active women concerned about having more gender representation, why are only the most "viable" women worthy of attention? Also, I believe all candidates need to address gender equality issues, McCain included and on the local level.
  • • Reply
    • Report Abuse
    Posted By:
    dr spaceman at 06/05/2008 5:22:51 PM
    Comment:
    Umm... excuse us, but Cynthia McKinney is not a white woman, so she doesn't count. You don't think the majority of white Hillary feminists actually consider black women as "feminine" do you?
    
    Where have you been since the overt racism of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, 'till Gloria Steinem and Geraldine Ferraro?
    • • Reply
      • Report Abuse
      Posted By:
      HCSCTgirl at 06/06/2008 12:46:25 PM
      Comment:
      That's ridiculous. As a white young feminist, I would vote for McCain if he picked Condoleezza Rice as his running mate, I am so starved to see female representation in the highest level of government. And I don't agree with Rice on pretty much any issue. The reason thats McKinney is not given attention is because she is running in the green party, which by any measure is not the same as running in the Democratic or Republican party in terms of exposure. Lets get real.
• • Reply
  • Report Abuse
  Posted By:
  ladydator at 06/05/2008 5:01:09 PM
  Comment:
  I think it's interesting that Ms. T