What's With All The Misogyny?

[ruggerson]

Hillary is a twice elected Senator from arguably the most important and powerful state in the nation.

She has served admirably on the Armed Services Committee, and in that role has earned much of her foreign policy credibility.

To reduce her "experience" to her role as First Lady is woman bashing, plain and simple.

Had she never run for office after serving as First Lady, I could understand some of these inane remarks, but she did. And won. Twice. She wouldn't be running for President of the United States, if she hadn't.

(disclaimer: I'm voting for Edwards, but this constant very clearcut misogynistic Hillary bashing is profoundly offensive. I don't expect it will stop, but there are many of us who know exactly what it is.)

[Clintonista2]

1. Strong women intimidate many people- including some democrats

I've seen this firsthand in many Hillary-bashing threads.

[IndianaGreen]

61. Hillary's call for first use of atomic weapons is reckless and dangerous

Playing the gender card to defend Hillary is demagoguery, just as Al Sharpton when he plays the race card to defend his role in the Tawana Brawley case.

Hillary is not a strong woman. She is a reckless and dangerous politician, just like Bush is. They both show a sociopathic and callous disregard for the human suffering that will be brought as a result of using atomic weapons.

[AZBlue]

75. And sadly they intimidate and annoy both men and women.

It's mind-boggling.

[Bunny]

2. Misogyny?? On DU???

N-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O!!!!!!!!



:sarcasm:

[wryter2000]

35. Hi, Bunny!

Figured I'd find you here. :evilgrin:

TOP is going to have a DVD out soon. If you pre-order, it'll come autographed.

www.towerofpower.com

I've seen a clip on YouTube, and it's awesome.

[Bunny]

39. I love their new website!

:hi: wryter!

[IndianaJones]

3. shocking. nt.

[Dawgs]

4. So, it's okay to call Obama "inexperienced", but not Hillary?

Maybe you should tell her, and her supporters, to stop using Bill's accomplishments as her own. Maybe then we will take her seriously. She is the one that started it, not anyone else.

If she can dish it out, she should have no problem when someone calls her on it.

[Deep13]

6. Yup.

Seven years in the Senate plus eight as a major operative in the Clinton WH (regardless of the label used) vs. three years in the Senate.

[Dawgs]

9. So you can claim a first lady in the WH as experience, but Obama can't use his life experiences?

Yep, you sound just like Hillary, and just like a Hillary supporter.

[Deep13]

11. He obviously can use what he wants.

Whether voters think his life experiences are qualifications for the presidency are another matter.

I don't have a horse in this race.

[Ellen Forradalom]

30. Who said anything about Obama?

Don't read anything about Obama into the post.

All candidates are free to cite life experience. Up to you, the voter, to decide which experience counts for more.

[grace0418]

19. Obama was also a state Senator. For Illinois, the state with the third largest

city in America. That might count for something. Or I guess not.

[krkaufman]

26. Wait, you're not going to include Obama's pre-US Senate experience?

Apples-to-Apples, please. Apples-to-Apples.

[Deep13]

40. Do you want to talk politics or produce?

:shrug:
Frankly, I don't think being governor is a good qualification for the presidency. The electorate usually disagrees with me on that. It is not that I am for HRC, but as far as arguments about experience go, she does have the better resume.

[krkaufman]

49. Ummm... Obama hasn't been governor.

But he *does* have more experience than 3 years in the US Senate. Again... no interest in including that experience in your comparison?

[Deep13]

51. Well, what is that experience?

Frankly, I have never heard it.

Was he a big city mayor? An ambassador? A Congressman? A Federal department head?

It does not matter what I consider to be adequate experience. What matters is after eight years of President Dumbass, will voters think he is up to the task?

[roguevalley]

44. I dislike her inbtensely for what she does and believes but now I

guess that's called misogyny, not a difference of opinion. sheesh. makes you wonder though, seriously, can a woman be a misogynist?

[Deep13]

52. Well, I must be a lot of nasty things then.

I think HRC is too chummy with groups ending with ", inc."--guess I'm a misogynist.

I don't think Obama has enough Federal experience so I'm a racist.

I think he is a bit too religious too, so I'm a religious bigot.

Add to that last one my dislike of Romney and the fact that I think Bush really is a typical Evangelical and that Islam really is violent.

I think Israel is more trouble than it is worth, therefore, an anti-semite.

Somehow thinking Richardson is too status quo does not make me anti-hispanic, but opposing illegal immigration does.

In point of fact a woman can be a misogynist. Look at what's-her-name who killed the E.R.A.

[Clintonista2]

10. No, when Hillary supporters call Obama inexperienced, they're called racist

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3422070&mesg_id=3422070

[Chulanowa]

38. And when someone criticizes Clinton, it can only be because they hate women?

And if you criticize Edwards, you're a corporate stooge. Criticism of Kucinich makes you a war slut fascist, too.

One would almost get the idea that DU posters would rather see Romney take the nation in '08, with all the vitriol and hatred being thrown at the Democratic candidates and their supporters.

[WhiteTara]

17. she's a two term senator

he's a first...yep, that's less experience.

Oh, and most that term he's been on the campaign trail, not being senatorial..

[Totally Committed]

5. How can you make this argument for her, when she and her campaign seem perfectly willing

to send Bill out to fight her major battles for her, and smooth over all her "spats" with other candidates. He's a former POTUS, and this is unseemly and unprecedented. It's not misogynist to state the truth. I do think it's misogynist to say she can't do the job because she's a woman, though.

When he stops doing her talking for her, I might concede her her "experience", but right now, even SHE seems to be saying her "expericence" is as "Bill's wife". -- Sad, but true. There is no feminist sensibility here. Sometimes I think she'd let him debate for her if she could.

I know not everyone agrees with this viewpoint, but it's as I see it.

TC

[Clintonista2]

12. I don't understand the whole "Hillary uses Bill" theme

Hillary doesn't "use" Bill, any more than Obama uses Michelle, or Edwards uses Elizabeth. The fact that Bill is a celebrity, certainly doesn't hurt her cause, and this infuriates the rabid Hillary-haters, thus the illogical "Hillary uses Bill too much" statements.

[Totally Committed]

14. Neither of those ladies is a former POTUS, for one thing.

They don't have the "clout" Bill does. They don't have the connections, the favors to call in, the influence to weild, at home and abroad. They are seen as an "addendum" to the candidate. Mrs. Clinton appears to be the "addendum" to Bill in most cases.

On another board the other day, a woman actually argued that Hillary would be the best POTUS because Bill was her "spouse" and would be right there in the WH, calling the shots. True or not, this is the way some people think.

TC

[Clintonista2]

16. When Bill ran, the slogan used was "two for one"

Say what you will about Hillary "leeching Bill's resume", it's known that Hillary was very active within the WH with regards to political matters. Claiming that Bill steals Hillary's thunder, is an illogical statement, because we know that if Bill draws a large crowd, it's most likely made up of Clinton supporters who would be voting for Hillary anyways, and would be very willing to contribute cash to the Hillary campaign.

[Ellen Forradalom]

31. Which disqualifies her, somehow?

I'm not following your logic. I don't see where he has overshadowed her candidacy by his actions.

By your logic, Charles de Gaulle should never have led France because Mme de Gaulle was highly influential. Nor should Kennedy have been President because his wife was way too intelligent and beautiful. Only a man or woman with a total shrinking violet of a spouse (think Pat Nixon) should be allowed into the White House.

[JANdad]

7. Please don't drag Edwards into this...

I have not seen ANYONE on this board (repeat: "I" have not seen) trash Hillary simply for being a woman...I may have missed a post where that has taken place...but to call all critisism as mysoginistic really lessens the word...imho

[Totally Committed]

8. I totally agree... criticism is not mysogyny.

Hillary can stand on her own against anyone. Trust me.

TC

[ruggerson]

53. What do call this thread?

If not both mysogynistic and misleading?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3423167

[question everything]

13. Her first win could have been cricized

that way. Clearly she would not have won had she not been the first lady.

But her second win was fair and square. And, yes, at least during the debates she has demonstrated her knowledge and approach to issues to the rest of us, not New Yorkers.

[MGKrebs]

48. It's not clear at all whether she would have won or not.

If she hadn't have been First Lady, what would she have been? Former First Lady of Arkansas? So many possible paths for her it is hard to even speculate.

[jgraz]

15. Sorry, which part of "unprincipled corporate toady" is misogynist?

Cuz I wouldn't want to offend anyone...

[Totally Committed]

20. It's only mysogynyst of you say she's an "unprincipled corporate toady" because she's female...

Otherwise, it's not offensive, and to some people, even true!

TC

[jgraz]

21. But isn't is somewhat offensive to toads?

I wouldn't want to be accused of misamphibiny

[Totally Committed]

22. "misamphibiny"...

:rofl:


TC

[chill_wind]

27. LOL! :-) You two are good. n/t

[femrap]

18. To certain males, even the idea of a woman

being capable of doing the job that typically only males have done in the past is enough to shrivel that appendage....because if a woman can do it, then it must not be a very important job. After all, our culture has told these males that women are less....and if they're doing the job of a male, what does that make him?

Scares the hell out of them...and when males are scared, they get very, very mean.

It's a damn shame there are so many insecure, frightened, and willfully ignorants out there who keep the human race from evolving.

(Bet I'm going to be using that 'ignore' button today.)

BTW, women were not allowed to use the typewriter when it was first invented...then the males decided it was boring and beneath them. And now with computers and the downsizing of administration assts. (dominated by women), typing is now referred to us keyboarding. Women type, males keyboard. Just a little example of our patriarchy in action.

[Ellen Forradalom]

32. We have a winner!

"....because if a woman can do it, then it must not be a very important job."

DING DING DING! So easy even your Mom can do it! Motherhood can't be hard, 50% of the population is qualified! He must be gay, he's doing a girl job (hairdresser, flight attendant, nurse)! Democrats are "girly-men!"

[RufusTFirefly]

34. Legitimate issue distorted for an illegitimate purpose

I've even gone so far as to defend Ann Coulter against offensive misogynistic remarks.
And there's no question that among those who oppose HRC, some of them do so out of misogyny.
Others, alas, attempt to poison the well by suggesting that everyone who opposes Hillary is a misogynist.
Just as some suggest that "Bush haters" are just delivering payback for years of "Clinton bashing."

This may be true for some, but it's insulting the majority of people from the "Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party" who oppose Clinton's triangulation and corporate toadyism and, above all, her unapologetic vote to give an obvious sociopath free rein to wage war.

[Summer93]

23. Names

Perhaps all candidates should be referred to by their first names.

Only Hillary is mentioned as Hillary not Clinton. All the men running for this office are known by their last names. I think this is an effort to diminish the one woman running.

Perhaps all candidates could be known by their first names.

Barak would not be mistaken for Osama, etc.

[JANdad]

28. Then she is doing that to herself

Since all her campaign stuff says: Hillary '08

[Ellen Forradalom]

33. Actually it's a measure of her fame.

There's only one Hillary that springs to mind.

[Clark2008]

45. Sir Edmund?

:shrug:

[Alexander]

43. She's called "Hillary" to distinguish her from the OTHER Clinton...

You know, Bill.

BTW, it seems like you're accusing Hillary Clinton of mysoginy, since she has the word "Hillary" in nice big letters on ALL of her signs and memorabilia.

Don't believe me? Go to her website. Look at the top-left corner. Heck, look at the whole thing. The name "Hillary" is everywhere.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/

Your argument is beyond ridiculous.

You seem concerned.

[jgraz]

59. Yeh, kind of like Saddam.

:hide:

[Hippo_Tron]

67. Yea I dunno if Bush could make a case for overthrowing King Faisal

Although I could see him trying.

[cui bono]

70. And look at all the misogyny directed at him!

[krkaufman]

24. More like Hillogyny.

Some of the anti-Hillary sentiment *does* come from mysogyny, cultural reaction to an aggressive, strong female, etc., but some also comes from Hillary's calculating behavior... from the several adjustments to what she's to be called, to the flag-burning amendment, to her Iraq resolution vote, and so on...

It's no more fair to categorize all Hillary criticism as mysogynistic than it is to judge Hillary differently from every other politician simply because she's a woman.

[Demeter]

25. It's Hillary's Misogyny That Bothers Me

I don't feel she represents me or my daughters, or has the slightest awareness of how her decisions have hurt our lives.

[krkaufman]

29. Any specific examples?

(This is an honest question. I'm sincerely interested in how Hillary's actions have tangibly affected people.)

[Demeter]

37. First Off Would Have to Be Her War Record

and her votes for the Patriot Act and its renewal.

[krkaufman]

50. Ah, ok. Those are the obvious issues, non-specific to gender.

Has she pushed, blocked, or insufficiently supported any issues/legislation that you felt was detrimental specifically to women? (I ask because, being a guy, I'm less likely to have been as shocked as one directly impacted by her (in)actions.)

[Demeter]

56. Excuse Me?

Do you think war and its consequences are not specific to women? Since we are a numerical majority, and over-represented among the poorest quintiles, war is the first thing that impacts us. It takes away our families: husbands, sisters and brothers, children, parents, and this bastard war is taking even grandparents; our jobs are lost, our tax monies are squandered, we lose everything in every way. War does NOTHING for us, except pain and loss that lasts for generations.

How much more specific do you want to get?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

58. You've misunderstood the term "specific".

"Specific to women" means not merely that it effects women, but that it doesn't effect non-women, or at least effects them to a much lesser extent.

[wryter2000]

36. Not that I disagree with you

But you'll see all kinds of mudslinging around here during primary season. If some people thought they'd earn points by calling her a green Martian, they'd try that, too.

You learn which threads to stay out of after a while.

PS I'm for Edwards, too.

[abq e streeter]

41. I agree, and here are other examples

Its obvious that the only reason anyone would criticize, or for that matter, not bow down in awe in front of Hillary has to be misogyny and woman bashing. This HAS to stop! Why would anyone oppose ANY woman if not for that one and only possible explanation. So I would like to hear no more clearly misogynist-based criticism of other fine women in public life such as Condi Rice, or Ann Coulter for example. Here, by the way is a quote from Molly Ivins under the headline : "Enough, WEASELLY Dems! Stand Up"... " I'd like to make it clear ...that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president.Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone...Clinton...is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her. Her failure to speak on Terri Schiavo, not to mention that gross pandering on flag-burning, are just CONTEMPTIBLE LITTLE DODGES." Clearly Molly Ivins was a woman bashing misogynist too.

[sandnsea]

42. SHE claims it as experience SHE DOES

If she's running as a one term Senator - then that's the experience people would address. SHE is the one who is saying that being First Lady is a qualification for President. It's like attacking people for calling her Hillary when SHE is the one who approved the campaign logo HILLARY.

What a bunch of babies.

[zulchzulu]

46. So if you disagree with Clinton being the best candidate, it's misogynistic?

Oh.

OK.

:crazy:

[ulysses]

47. sorry, but I don't care for her politics.

Her plumbing has exactly zip to do with it.

[ruggerson]

54. Which is legitimate

but, pretending that her only foreign policy cred comes from her tenure as First Lady isn't.

What is what the OP is about.

[Jai4WKC08]

55. The Senate isn't much for experience

And she's only spent one full term in the Senate.

If a single Senate term makes Hillary Clinton seem experienced, it's only because the other two top-tier candidates are even less experienced than she. But that's not really what it's about.

Most of the people who extol Clinton's experience are talking about her time as First Lady. A lot of them really mean Bill's experience, figuring she'll lean on him for guidance and direction -- that may be misogynistic, but you hear it all the time from rank and file Democrats. Even from women. Hell, even women who think of themselves as feminists.

[ChiciB1]

57. Call It A Two Family Monarchy... I'm Thinking We Need To Make

a switch! I have often wondered about Big Dawg & Bush I and it makes me queasy! I'm not trying to start anything, but hey... there ARE more than TWO families in America!!

[OneBlueSky]

60. it's not misogyny . . . at least for some of us New Yorkers . . .

it's the fact that we re-elected Hillary to represent us in the Senate, and to do her damnedest to stop the BushCo insurgency from turning this country into a dictatorship . . . almost immediately after the election, however, she chose to spend her time running for president rather than leading the fight against BushCo in the Senate . . .

I voted for Sen. Clinton to represent me in Congress, not to spend her time running around the country drumming up money and votes . . . as far as I'm concerned, she's simply not doing the job I elected her to do . . . so why should I vote for her for even higher office? . . .

[Hippo_Tron]

68. Oh come on, everybody knew that she was running

If you didn't like being used as a stepping stone for the Presidency you should have voted for someone else. It was obvious by late 2005 with the amount of cash that she was raising to defend a safe senate seat that she was running.

[Perry Logan]

62. The Right hate women. Hillary is the victim of right-wing misogyny in the corporate media.

By sheer force of media repetition, many liberals parrot this bigotry.

[jgraz]

72. Oh please. Hillary's a victim of her own cowardice and unprincipled triangulation.

She has no problem standing up to the right witng morans. But I've yet to see her stand up to her corporate backers.

[sendero]

63. What's with all the straw men?

Claiming that people don't like HRC because she is a woman is moronic. Tell you what, you put a REAL woman in the race, I'm thinking of Clair McCaskill, I'll not only vote for her I'll WORK for her election.

I won't waste my time with the reasons I don't like HRC. We all know them. Why don't you just accept that some of us have higher standards than you do and leave it at that.

[Hippo_Tron]

69. I'd support Barbara Boxer over Obama in a heartbeat

Unfortunately Boxer isn't running.

[Smarmie Doofus]

64. If you are going to ascribe 'misogyny' to her critics...

... you should provide some examples that prove your point.

You don't do this, however. You merely restate the charge without making a case.

Saying it's "clearcut" and "plain and simple" isn't the same as furnishing evidence that her critics are motivated by misogyny.

They may be *unfair* if they minimize her accomplishments, ( they are NOT, imo) but that may not be attributable to misogyny( it's certainly isn't in my case). It may be attributable to a host of other factors: they don't like her husband, they don't like her political apparatus, they don't like what they see as her sense of entitlement; they don't like people from Illinois; they don't like residents of Chappaqua, NY, etc. etc. etc.

It's up to you, seems to me, having made the charge , to establish the connection.

[ruggerson]

65. See post #53

and follow the link. And that's just one, sad example.

And remember the OP refers to those that are debating her "experience" as it relates to her role as First Lady.

Opposing her because of policy differences is, self evidently, perfectly legitimate.

[jgraz]

73. One post does not a broadbrush make

Hillary supporters would like to paint her as a victim of the woman-hating right (itself a sad, woman-as-victim spin), when, in fact, she's almost always challenged from the left on this board.

Why don't you deal with the anti-corporate, anti-triangulating, anti-pandering attacks first? Then your cries of misogyny might have a scintilla of credibility.

[Rowdyboy]

66. My opinion of Hillary is improving steadily. The more I read from her opponents,

the more I like her. Right-wing men, particularly my Southern "christian" brothers here in Mississippi would pee their pants if she won the presidency. They would face 4 years of their WORST nightmares come true. That, alone, would make it worthwhile!

Her opponents on the left would bitch but most would be won over in time when she proved to be a first rate president.

(disclaimer: I'm also voting for Edwards and Obama is my second choice, but I'll support Clinton happily if she's the party's choice)

[saltpoint]

71. ruggerson, I'm just now getting to this thread.

Sorry for the tardiness. I agree with what you're saying and like you, am supporting John Edwards.

Your post here calls for a respectful assessment of candidates on their merits and in context of their overall, long-term contributions and attributes, and discourages below-the-belt dismissals.

I think you're right on and that your post here is very healthy for the whole process.

Bravo.

[HuffleClaw]

74. so next time you fly you'd be happy to have the spouse of the pilot flying the plane?

after all, that EXPERIENCE counts for a lot.

[laugle]

76. Thanks for this post! You like my

husband, obviously like and respect women!

Your post is right on target, and correctly illustrates the crap that woman of Hilliary's caliber have to put-up with, not to mention the enormous double standard!