It doesn’t excuse the context it was used in.
So a quotation corrected attributed to a respected Feminist/POC scholar-activist and employed by another POC leads us... here? I don’t get it. It feels like you’re reducing everyone involved to their gender.
And the Clinton camp was the first one to run with “the other guy’s supporters are the wooorst” narrative.
Or the same kind of people who are internet assholes everywhere also make up a part of Clinton’s support? Like they do for Sanders and Trump and Cruz and Rubio and... everyone ever?
Its kind of sad to see things get so ugly within the Democrat camp.
Really? Because I thought Bernie Sanders was exciting women about politics more than any other candidate?
We might need to come up with a clever name for generally-female Clinton supporters who dog other females for not supporting her on the basis of gender.
Same thing with the “BernieBros” where 50% of the two sources provided as evidence traced directed to conservative trolls.
Do you actually think that 95% of the electorate actually understands any of this? They don’t.
She was never not “sold out”. Sorry for the double negative.
The problem is that it really calls her entire body of work into question when she reveals that powerful women act the same way as powerful men and that maybe, just maybe, this all has a lot less to do with gender identity and a lot more to do with wealth and privilege.
That guy is more correct than he realizes. Sanders is bringing people into the so-called “big tent” that were never invited, specifically.
I really believe this is all scramble because Clinton assumed that Obama’s electoral math from 2012 would stay true (and I admit I thought it would, too). “Women” were the specific demographic that gave Obama the edge in 2012, and Clinton took that demo for granted.
My partner counts Steinem amongst her shortlist of heroes and she’s pissed. Like, way to negate the agency of women, Gloria fucking Steinem.
While Clinton’s decisions and supported policies have been disasters in practice, she’ll do anything to attack anyone she can to avoid speaking about them: https://theintercept.com/2016/01/31/the…
Well, considering that the sourcing for the attack pieces fall apart... https://theintercept.com/2016/01/31/the…
Like the default being crying “sexist!” and doing every possible to avoid having to address actual issues instead of perceived attacks on one of the most privileged women in the world?
Regardless of anything else, the man who has been accused of sexual assault by multiple women shouldn’t open his mouth on the subject.
With all seriousness, it is absolutely, 100% about her positions, her record and her unwillingness to step outside of attempting to maintain the political status-quo as it stands, now.