HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Women's Rights and the ca...

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 06:34 AM

Women's Rights and the candidates...

Today I want to discuss an issue we often skirt around. Women's Rights and the Candidates.

I often see claims that Bernie Sanders is just as big a fighter for Women's Rights as Hillary has been. As a woman, I will tell you that while it sounds good, it just isn't so. A man can be an ally in fighting for Women's Rights, but no man has ever stood on the front line on that issue. It's impossible to walk a mile in our high heels unless you are a woman. You can support us, but you can't fight our battles for us, we fight them every day and we have been fighting them our entire lives.

Bernie Sanders never stood on the world stage and told us that Women's Rights are Human Rights.
The United States Senate is made up of only 20% women. This in a country where the population is over 50% female. The percentage of women is even less in the House of Representatives.

Back in the 70's, Hillary Clinton applied for a credit card and was denied because she was a woman. They told her to use her husband's card. At the time, she was making more money than her husband. Somehow I don't think that has ever happened to a man.

If Hillary Clinton or her supporters raise the issue of Women's Rights, we are accused of throwing out the 'gender card' ....I have even heard the term 'vagina card'. That defense seems to be used to shut us up on the issue and concede that it isn't relevant or not applicable. I am telling you that it is very much relevant to women around the world 24/7. When women out number men in the work force, but still only make 71 cents for every dollar a man makes. When a woman's right to choose is still a battle ground and when women are denied access to contraception because their employer's morality somehow gives them the ability to tell us what to do with our bodies, when there is a war to deny women even the ability to have a mammogram then Women's Rights should be on every candidate's front burner.

I don't deny that Bernie Sanders has advocated for women's rights....many men have. BUT, men have never walked in our high heels. A man has never been denied a job or a promotion or equal pay because he is a woman. A man has never been denied the right to vote because he is a woman. A man has never been denied the right to drive or to own property because he is a woman. He may be our ally.....but he is not our champion. Our champion is Hillary Clinton. She has walked thousands of miles in our high heels.

It's time for men to quit telling us that they will be our allies. We women who are voting for Hillary want a leader in our war on women and that leader must be someone who has walked the walk, not someone who has witnessed it.



79 replies, 8366 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 79 replies Author Time Post
Reply Women's Rights and the candidates... (Original post)
BooScout Oct 2015 OP
CarlaJonesChicago Oct 2015 #1
boston bean Oct 2015 #2
Skidmore Oct 2015 #9
Armstead Oct 2015 #20
boston bean Oct 2015 #26
Armstead Oct 2015 #35
boston bean Oct 2015 #37
Armstead Oct 2015 #41
boston bean Oct 2015 #42
BooScout Oct 2015 #44
Armstead Oct 2015 #46
BooScout Oct 2015 #47
Armstead Oct 2015 #52
BooScout Oct 2015 #54
Armstead Oct 2015 #63
BooScout Oct 2015 #64
Armstead Oct 2015 #65
BooScout Oct 2015 #66
Armstead Oct 2015 #67
NurseJackie Oct 2015 #24
Rose Siding Oct 2015 #34
LexVegas Oct 2015 #74
leftofcool Oct 2015 #3
A Little Weird Oct 2015 #4
boston bean Oct 2015 #5
A Little Weird Oct 2015 #6
boston bean Oct 2015 #8
A Little Weird Oct 2015 #12
BooScout Oct 2015 #14
NurseJackie Oct 2015 #30
boston bean Oct 2015 #17
BooScout Oct 2015 #7
Laser102 Oct 2015 #11
Armstead Oct 2015 #10
LWolf Oct 2015 #13
BooScout Oct 2015 #15
PotatoChip Oct 2015 #25
retrowire Oct 2015 #16
BooScout Oct 2015 #19
CharlotteVale Oct 2015 #22
BooScout Oct 2015 #27
kag Oct 2015 #45
retrowire Oct 2015 #48
BooScout Oct 2015 #53
retrowire Oct 2015 #58
BooScout Oct 2015 #60
retrowire Oct 2015 #69
BooScout Oct 2015 #70
retrowire Oct 2015 #72
BooScout Oct 2015 #73
retrowire Oct 2015 #78
BooScout Oct 2015 #79
eridani Oct 2015 #18
CharlotteVale Oct 2015 #21
seaglass Oct 2015 #23
BooScout Oct 2015 #28
seaglass Oct 2015 #33
BooScout Oct 2015 #38
djean111 Oct 2015 #29
Boomer Oct 2015 #39
sarge43 Oct 2015 #49
sufrommich Oct 2015 #31
MohRokTah Oct 2015 #32
LineLineReply .
Ed Suspicious Oct 2015 #56
Armstead Oct 2015 #68
DrBulldog Oct 2015 #36
vorgan24 Oct 2015 #40
BooScout Oct 2015 #62
NCTraveler Oct 2015 #43
ejbr Oct 2015 #50
Spazito Oct 2015 #51
Android3.14 Oct 2015 #55
Ed Suspicious Oct 2015 #57
JackInGreen Oct 2015 #77
Tierra_y_Libertad Oct 2015 #59
Name removed Oct 2015 #61
MoonRiver Oct 2015 #71
Uncle Joe Oct 2015 #75
JackInGreen Oct 2015 #76

Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 06:43 AM

1. Amen

I agree with you all the way. It's like women should be seen and not heard. To be honest, women are smarter than men to me. We deserve to be treated like we do matter. We need more women standing in higher positions. Our visibility needs to be acknowledged. We matter!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 06:47 AM

2. The terms Race Card, Gender Card are pejoratives that are used to deny inequality exists.

Gets someone a lot of likes/kicks when these pejoratives are thrown around.

But to the women and others who recognize inequality it is offensive beyond offensive.

I really wish progressives would cease doing that shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #2)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:03 AM

9. Hear! Hear!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #2)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:28 AM

20. Any "card" is a card when it's used to stifle debate over issues and qualifications

 

Those issues INCLUDE inequality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #20)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:55 AM

26. Not exactly sure what you are meaning,

but am I correct in reading your response that person who speak of inequality and the ways they are discriminated against are playing a card?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #26)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:12 AM

35. I am saying....

 

that IMO Hillary demeans the very issue she claims to be championing, and which you see her championing with this latest nonsense of using the gender "card" against Sanders in a politically opportunistic way.

And it also reinforces the stereotype that you say is so destructive. It demeans the very real issues of equality by raising it in a phony way.

There is plenty of room to discuss the problems you referred to in the OP. So why did she use it as a cheap shot against Sanders in a way that only alienates people who are otherwise supportive of those goals?

They were debating the issue of gun control. Sanders said he believes we should not, as a nation, be shouting about the issue but looking to build a consensus.

Fine, they had a debate over an issue. If Clinton had left it at that, okay.

So why the next day, did SHE have to bring women equality into it in such a flippant and calculated way? Why did she choose to mischaracterize it and personalize it in that way?

That, IMO, demeaned the issue of how women are treated. It left the impression that she has to be treated "special" and delicately because she is a woman. There can't be heated exchanges in politics if it involves a woman and a man. That to me is reinforcing the stereotype.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #35)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:14 AM

37. So, persons who make a point based on a pretty obvious stereotype, that women

who hold strong opinions are shouting, or yelling or are unhinged, and men get a pass, are responsible for those stereotypes?

I don't think so.

Maybe us women who recognize these bullshit stereotypes ought to just keep our lips pursed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #37)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:22 AM

41. Bernie Sanders himself is often accused of shouting

 

So why is that fair game, but he can't use that word when referring to the overall tone of the gun control controversy?

First he was not referring to her specifically, but to the overall tone of the gun issue.

Men tell other men to stop shouting all the time. I've been told by women to stop shouting on a few occasions. (I'm not generally a shouting type in real life, but occasionally....) Women tell other women to stop shouting.

No you shouldn't "keep your lips pursed." But how about accepting that a level playing field means not being immune to the way that people express themselves in ways that don't necessarily relate to gender?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #41)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:24 AM

42. You didn't find it at all curious that a man who actually yells/shouts throughout the debate and his

stump speeches, was critical of a woman he perceived to be yelling/shouting?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #42)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:26 AM

44. Ironic isn't it? NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #42)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:52 AM

46. No more than if he'd said it to a man

 

You're correct. There was a bit of a double standard in that. Bernie does tend to shout at times. Part of his personality.

But he was referring metaphorically to the tone of the national debate about guns. He could have used otehr words like "both sides talking at each other instead of to each other" or "taking rigid positions and taling over each other" ...whatever.

He was simply making the point that we treat the issue in a polarizing way, rather than working as a nation to achieve progress on the forms of gun control that most people agree with.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with his position on that, his position and the issue are what are important, not whether he used a certain word in a certain way. He made his point.

This kind of crap is why our national politics has become so shallow and meaningless and unproductive.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #46)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:59 AM

47. Why is it meaningless and unproductive?

Because he was called on it?

Bernie shouts all the time and using his logic, all his shouting doesn't mean he will accomplish one thing. Perhaps we should start telling Sanders to calm down and stop shouting at us?

Perhaps for once he should just listen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #47)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:22 AM

52. If you want to tell Sanders to calm down and stop shouting that's fine with me

 

Shouting is not the worst thing in the world. Sometimes we all have to shout about something,and sometimes it is necessary to make a point.

But it can also be counterproductuve. Too much shouting can be annoying, or it can overwhelm actual constructive discussion.

If you think Sanders shouts too much, by all means say that, tell him, whatever. It's one of his traits. He's a combative person. People are free to like it or not.

But it would be deflecting to make that about gender.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #52)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:30 AM

54. In your opinion....

Not in mine. If I am debating something that I am passionate about and a man tells me to stop shouting or to calm down then that man is patronizing me and being paternalistic in trying to 'put me in my place'. It's not my problem if you are blind to this, many women deal with it daily and frankly it's getting old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #54)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 10:25 AM

63. IF you want to put everything into that rigid framewoirk be my guest

 

I think humans are more complex than that, as are situations and issues.

But if you prefer to apply a consistent formula and narrow spectrum of reasons for all situations....okay, whatever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #63)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 10:27 AM

64. So because we disagree....

My framework is 'rigid' because it does not meet your narrative. Got it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #64)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 10:35 AM

65. My narratuve is that there are no simple all purpose answers to anything

 

Yes sexism is an issue, and gender stereotypes have an impact. No denying that fact. No defense of it either.

But say there's a bunch of men in a room hashing something out, and during an especially heated exchange and one of them gets exasperated and says to another man...."Quit shouting. This is getting us nowhere." That does happen in real life.

Where does sexism against women factor into that?

Why is that different than the same room and a group of mixed gender who are hashing out the same things in the same way, if one of the men gets exasperated at a woman and says the same thing to her?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #65)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 10:46 AM

66. Was the man in your hypothetical room of men....

...shouting when he told the other 'man' to stop shouting? And does the man in the room who said that actually shout a lot? Since your room ful of men scenario can't nkw be sexist since you have redefined your narrative, can it still be hypocritical?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #66)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 11:07 AM

67. That's open to interpretation...Like all of life

 

The man told not to to shout may or may not acting explosive and monopolizing the discussion. Or perhaps the other man is being overly sensitive to reasonable give-and-take. Or perhaps the man who said Stop Shouting was simply trying to lower the volume to get the discussion back on track.

No simple all encompassing answer can be given. depends in the situation.

Likewise, if it is a man and woman, perhaps the woman really is shouting excessively. Or perhaps she is just expressing her opinion in a reasonable way, and the other man is a sexist who can't tolerate a woman doing that.

As I noted earlier, yes sometimes stereotypes, a sense of entitlement sexist are factors. But it can't continually be reduced to that. Many otehr factors are involved, including temperament, situations, etc. No simple all purpose answer to cover all possibilities. People are people. That, I thought, was the whole point of working to achieve equality. Allowing people to be themselves, with no artificial limitations or privileges based on birth characteristics

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #2)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:52 AM

24. Absolutely true! No two ways about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #2)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:09 AM

34. And the term "vagina card"

tossed around in some angry random internet convo would feel like a violation to me. I really hate to see the normalization of terms which serve no purpose other than to offend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #2)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 01:09 PM

74. Thank you. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 06:54 AM

3. Excellent post!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 06:55 AM

4. Were you appointed the spokeswoman for all women?

I didn't think so. You don't speak for me. My champion is most certainly not Hillary Clinton and I will not cast a vote for her or anyone solely based on gender. That would be absurd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Little Weird (Reply #4)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 06:57 AM

5. Who spoke for you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #5)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 06:59 AM

6. I will excert for you

He may be our ally.....but he is not our champion. Our champion is Hillary Clinton.


"Our" - sounds to me like the OP is trying to speak for all women. If she was speaking for herself she would "My".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Little Weird (Reply #6)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:01 AM

8. For persons that agree, that would be a truthful statement.

Do you think any time, any one voices an opinion they are speaking directly for you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #8)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:10 AM

12. Really?

The rest of the OP she uses "I" and it's quite clear what she means. In that paragraph she divides us up by gender and talks about how men can be our ally but not our champion. Do you really see that as not trying to speak for all women?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Little Weird (Reply #12)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:15 AM

14. You are splitting hairs...

I am not a professional writer, I write from the heart. Nor is there any nefarious plot going on here. I am speaking my mind and what I suspect is also the opinion for many women. You obviously don't agree, but let's not make a conspiracy theory out of my thoughts on the issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #14)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:02 AM

30. I've noticed that when someone is at a loss for a meaningful (or even clever) response …

… they often fall back on picking nits as an way to be dismissive. Such as "How can anyone take this post seriously? JUST LOOK AT ALL THE PUNCTUATION ERRORS!" Or "Anyone who doesn't know the difference between your and you're shouldn't be posting online." Or "Get back to me when you learn how to proofread and when you can get your verbs and pronouns to agree."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Little Weird (Reply #12)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:25 AM

17. I really can see she is speaking to women who agree, not for all women like you.

Usually when I see something I disagree with, I say the reason why. I don't accuse the person of speaking FOR me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Little Weird (Reply #4)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:00 AM

7. I speak for myself....

I'll be voting for Hillary not because she is a woman, but because she is the best candidate for the job times two. And she got there while dancing backwards and in high heels. ....and I speak for a lot of women, thus the 'our'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Little Weird (Reply #4)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:03 AM

11. Yes BooScout speaks for all women. We had a vote. It was unanimous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:03 AM

10. I will NEVER understand what it is like to have red hair

 

Last edited Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:37 AM - Edit history (1)

I have blonde hair. I have never experienced the situation of people with red hair. Therefore, I can never have anything to say and cannot address any issue that might affect people who have red hair. If I were a candidate I could never represent people with red hair. I just don't understand.

I can't fight for any issue because I will never understand what it is like to have red hair.

And likewise, someone with red hair will never understand what it is like to be blonde.

And I will NEVER vote for a candidate who is not a blonde.

Yes that is ridiculous. But no more ridiculous than a lot of the "cards" that are used to attempt to make politicians immune from criticism or, conversely to marginalize them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:12 AM

13. We don't all walk in high heels.

Many of us who've been walking the walk our entire lives understand that high heels are bad for our feet and won't support us for the distance. Many of us who walk the walk now, who've been walking the walk our entire lives, support Sanders.

Of course, no one can speak for all of "we women," but I'll agree that we women who aren't brainwashed by religious propaganda into taking a back seat want a leader in the fight, and want that leader to be a woman.

Personally, I'd like a leader I could trust. HRC is not that person, but there are many great, strong women out there that could be.

I still want Sanders to be POTUS. The POTUS is a leader on many issues, not one, and he already leads on most of those issues. I don't like where HRC's "leadership" takes us on those.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #13)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:18 AM

15. A figure of speech...

Personally I gave up high heels years ago because they were ruining my feet.


We'll agree to disagree on our preferred candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #13)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:53 AM

25. Absolutely. I don't trust her one bit. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:21 AM

16. facepalm*

way to step on male allies.

I know this isn't about us men but just because we don't know what it's like to live it, doesn't mean we don't have the empathy to understand it.

and its kind of sexist in itself to claim that women are better than men at fighting for women's rights because of their gender.

your entire post goes on to discredit Bernie's position on women's rights simply because of his gender, as if that is enough to degrade his actions. but it's the truth, he and Hillary stand side by side in this issue. thems the brakes.

I'm not saying a man can be better because he's a man. But you're saying a woman is better because she's a woman.

actions speak louder than gender is basically what I'm saying.

true feminism is about equality of genders, not about the idea of misandry. and that's what this OP reads as. "only women should speak for women because they are women."

no, sorry, we're equal. and as long as we are an empathetic people, we can all, as a team, speak for each other.

/rant

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #16)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:28 AM

19. So....because I speak out on women's rights....

...and would prefer a woman as champion of those rights, you feel the need to accuse me of hating men. Interesting.....and oh so wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #19)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:48 AM

22. Where did he accuse you of hating men?

As a woman, I think he is exactly right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CharlotteVale (Reply #22)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:55 AM

27. He said....

That the OP reads as 'misandry' .....which the last time I checked is defined as the hatred of men.

As a woman and as the author of the op, I say he could not be further from the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CharlotteVale (Reply #22)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:36 AM

45. I agree, CharlotteVale.

I find the OP offensive, frankly. My husband and all three of my brothers have been champions for many causes, women's rights among them. I strongly disagree with the OP that men can't be "champions" on this issue.

I also disagree that Hillary is the right person to lead this country. Yes, she's a woman, and I would love to see a woman in the oval office some day. But frankly, Hillary scares me.

And Bernie has been a consistent and proven advocate for women, minorities, children, and on almost every issue I care about. He doesn't have to be a woman, minority, or child to fight hard for our rights. He's shown that many times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #19)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:09 AM

48. hating?

no. but I used the word degrading.

thanks for playing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #48)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:23 AM

53. You used the word MISANDRY...

...in describing the OP.....So yes you indeed did use 'hate' by definition of what 'misandry' means...the hatred of men. You fail on your deflection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #53)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:42 AM

58. it also means prejudice

mis·an·dry/miˈsandrē/noun

dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against men (i.e., the male sex).

I mean even the full definition doesn't say hatred but whatever.

your op is clearly prejudiced against Bernie's ability to champion women's rights because of his gender.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #58)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:55 AM

60. Misandry:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misandry

Misandry (/mɪˈsændri/), from the Greek misos (μῖσος, "hatred" and anēr, andros (ἀνήρ, gen. ἀνδρός; "man", is the hatred or dislike of men or boys.[1][2] Misandry can be manifested in numerous ways, including sexual discrimination, denigration of men, violence against men, or sexual objectification[3] of men. The term misandrist was first used in 1871.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #60)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 11:13 AM

69. it still also means prejudice

so look, you lost your argument and now its degenerated into a bickerfest over the meaning of a single word.

point still stands, it still means prejudiced, your op is prejudiced against someone strictly because of their gender, case closed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #69)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 11:28 AM

70. LOL....

I didn't lose the argument. You however did your best to deflect away from the OP by mansplaining.

Case closed indeed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #70)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 12:11 PM

72. ahh more prejudice

now my opinion is invalid because I'm a male speaking to a woman about feminism.

misandry.

and ahem, seems to me 2 women have agreed with my "mansplaining" so please continue your inaccurate interpretations of how feminism should be spread and handled.

how very fair of you. this male ally will continue working for you alongside Bernie, regardless of your prejudice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #72)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 01:08 PM

73. How gracious of you....

It's always nice to have a man work for me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #73)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 01:35 PM

78. everyone needs help sometimes

gender does not equal the measure of a person.

Feminism is equality. I hope you'll understand that someday.

You shouldn't feel insulted or offended that a man is trying to explain that to you. A man is not lesser than you because of his gender.

Prejudice harms everyone. It only closes doors and covers ears.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #78)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 01:37 PM

79. And maybe you will understand....

When you walk a few miles in my shoes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:26 AM

18. Except for the rights of women in Iraq and Afghanistan

Because nobody fares better in the war of each against all as much as women. (Do I need ?)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:39 AM

21. "We women" nothing. You don't speak for this woman, I'm

voting for Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:50 AM

23. Hey Boo - can you edit that last line to say We women who are voting for Hillary instead of just We

women?

You wrote a great post (though I am uncommitted) and I'd hate to see it ruined by the usual suspects declaring you aren't speaking for them - it gets really boring.

I'd rather see people address your points instead of taking it off track as normally happens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seaglass (Reply #23)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:01 AM

28. I just did....

I had put Hillary supporters in the op already but that apparently wasn't enough so I've taken you up on your suggestion and added that. Thanks for the suggestion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Reply #28)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:09 AM

33. Well I am going to invent a new phrase, hopefully it will catch on like RTFM. It will be RTFP and

will be my response to anyone who does not Read The Fucking Post. lol

I'm afraid the edit might be too late or selective reading/interpretation is in play. Ah well, thanks for the edit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seaglass (Reply #33)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:14 AM

38. It wouldn't matter to some folks....

Last edited Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:01 AM - Edit history (1)

...had it been there from the beginnng.

I like RTFP! May I use that when appropriate? Lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:02 AM

29. I am a woman, and you do not speak for me, and I will not be voting for Hillary.

 

Her positions on war, fracking, the TPP, cluster bombs, Wall Street - just off the top of my head - those things are ruinous to women. And children. Her speeches don't mean squat. You think women will be exempted from the effects of these things? No, in many ways, they will bear the brunt.

No sale.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #29)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:20 AM

39. Thank you

I'm another woman who is less than impressed with HRC's policies. As a woman, my life will NOT improve if Wall Street continues to gut this country and we end up in endless wars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #29)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:10 AM

49. Thank you

I don't vote labels. A shared label doesn't mean squat either. If it did, I would have voted for McCain and Palin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:04 AM

31. Excellent OP,BooScout!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:06 AM

32. I expect an old man to start yelling at you over this. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #32)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:33 AM

56. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MohRokTah (Reply #32)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 11:08 AM

68. You rang?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:13 AM

36. What total nonsense.

 

"I often see claims that Bernie Sanders is just as big a fighter for Women's Rights as Hillary has been."

What made-up BS. Bernie has never claimed that himself, and he is fighting for the middle class and the poor on over a DOZEN OTHER major issues as well. Meanwhile Hillary has pretty much spent most of her time ALONE obsessing on the women's rights problem to the detriment of the other issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:21 AM

40. Ever hear of bill 3088 from 2000?

 

It was a bill that would require rapists to divulge their HIV status - And, if they didn't have proof of such, to be tested for it - to their victims.

Sanders wouldn't stand up for women, he wouldn't stand up for the victims of rape.

So much for being a 'supporter' of women.

Voting results for those intrested, http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2000/roll505.xml

Edit - Another example on him standing with people, children. He REFUSED to stand up to help protect children when he voted AGAINST the Federal Amber Alert legislation.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2006/09/21/sanders_vote_on_amber_alert_emerges_as_key_campaign_issue/

The article points out his hipocracsy - He said he was agaisnt the bill because he didn't like mandatory sentencing guidelines for child sex offenders, but the article points out that - At the time - he supported mandatory sentencing guidelines for sex offenders.

Random thought though, but this makes two bills meant to protect the victims of sexual abuse that he's voted against... hmmmm....

Thankfully though, despite his disagreements with mandatory sentencing, he voted in favor of the Violence Against Women Act. Guess he was smart enough to realize that he wouldn't be able to 'justify' voting against that.

Lets look a bit broader shall we? Immigrants this time.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2005/minutemen-other-anti-immigrant-militia-groups-stake-out-arizona-border

Sanders pushed for a ammendment - to the HSA Act of 07 - that PROTECTED this group of racists and (suspected) murderers.

Yeah, he 'stands up' for people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vorgan24 (Reply #40)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 10:22 AM

62. Thanks for those....

Very informative!

Welcome to DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 08:25 AM

43. It's the oppressed wealthy white males turn....errr....ummm.....

 

In short order they will find out how that play is going to work out for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:17 AM

50. So as a black man

Should I vote for Ben Carson because he has walked in my shoes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:19 AM

51. Good Op...

Hillary Clinton has been stellar on women's rights for decades, her speech in China in 1995 is just one example of her commitment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:32 AM

55. If it were Elizabeth warren, we'd all be standing behind her

 

With Clinton, she will screw over the 99% regardless of gender, race or age.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Android3.14 (Reply #55)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:34 AM

57. Guaranteed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Android3.14 (Reply #55)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 01:24 PM

77. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 09:51 AM

59. Voting for someone because of gender is the same as voting against someone because of gender.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 11:50 AM

71. Brilliant analysis of an issue we all should be concerned about!

Thank you Boo!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 01:12 PM

75. The military coup in Honduras did nothing to advance women's rights nor human rights.

Thanks for the thread, BooScout.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BooScout (Original post)

Wed Oct 28, 2015, 01:22 PM

76. I accept the idea that

No man can fight for women's rights like a woman...
but I don't accept it as a given fact that Hillary will fight harder for woman's rights than Bernie. Heels or no heels.

Speaking of, do my size 13 pumps count? They're a BEAST after a few hours...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread