I actually do see Hillary’s gender as a point in her favor—having more diversity represented in the most powerful positions in our government is a valid and important end in and of itself. It’s just that that one point is vastly outweighed, in my eyes, by all the points that go in Sanders’s favor when it comes to…

This! His comments are especially gross because it wasn’t very long ago when a uterus actually did disqualify one for the role of president.

There’s this pernicious thing that’s happening among some (SOME, not all) Sander’s supporters, that people who support Clinton are doing it out of ignorance, and if they just knew better than they’d of course go and support Sanders, and it’s a thing that comes up more often when they hear about women and minorities…

I mean, I have no real stake in this argument, but clearly Steinem and Albright weren’t saying “Vote for Clinton because uterus!” they were saying “Vote for Clinton because she’s fought for woman-friendly/anti-sexist policies and will continue to all the way to the top.”

Then why did he reduce Sanders’ opponent to her uterus?

What is ridiculous to me is the fact that either Killer Mike or Elliott used this language in the first place. It is one thing to say “I am voting based on issues, not on gender,” but focusing on her uterus (or vagina, which I have heard both men and women talk about this election cycle) reduces women to our…

I need to make sure to look at this sometime this week; surely with $104,000 in student loans I qualify for something. Someone please star this post so I see it in my notifications and remember to do it later.