NYT Reporter Suggests Sanders Is "Sexist" for Not Quitting Race

[Morphine Prince 109,683]

@ItsTommyBitch

Also, I think reducing candidates to one of their characteristics is the epitome of ignorance. 

When I see Obama I don't just see a black man. I see a Harvard graduate, a student of law, a president, an orator. 

When I see Clinton I don't just see a woman. I see a former first lady, secretary of state, someone with lots of experience. 

To say all people who do not vote for these individuals are racist or sexist is far beyond ignorance.

They both have IDEAS people may not agree with. They are more than a label. 

It is the accusers who are reducing them to their race and sexxx. 

[Eighteen 5,430]

liberals need to stop throwing these words around when it doesn't apply. i mean, really, come on. 

[Bt1 5,213]

No, but he can be called so many other names, like hypocrite.

[AJH219 4,448]

Never has  felt more appropriate 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

Well playing devil's advocate, I'm happy she asked this dumb question so that people who thought it was the case could get a response from the man himself

[Eighteen 5,430]

1 minute ago, LebaneseDude said:

Well playing devil's advocate, I'm happy she asked this dumb question so that people who thought it was the case could get a response from the man himself

he really tore her a new one like split dat in half status #sexist

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

 

44 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

No, no. I completely understand and agree with the things you posted BUT there are instances where people do throw these "cards" around out of ignorance. I am mostly talking about individual cases. I got called sexist by a peer once because I said I didn't like Hillary Clinton..... ????? 

Back in '08 I heard people saying if you don't vote for Obama you MUST be racist. 

I know sexism and racism are factors and are real issues, but it gets so annoying when it just so casually gets thrown around like this  

 

 

Well that's good

Im not sure if MJH fully agrees, but I think these are individual instances of extreme untenable views and bad communication... the implicit biases that inform subtle racism and sexism are stronger forces than individuals shouting "You're not voting for him because hes black! Racist!" and "You're only voting for him because he's black. Racist! ( at this one) at one another. 

I don't honestly hear anything that blunt that much coming from rational well educated people because both ideas are so ridiculously untenable. We can't even profess to be able to prove what another person is thinking definitively  That being said, I avoid arguments as well, basic as this. I don't engage with them. I don't think they are a big deal, though I can see how they'd be annoying. A few weeks ago, my old piano accompanist I've known since I was like 5 told me that she couldnt vote for Hillary because she's a woman and honestly just couldn't see a woman running the country because of their supposedly natural "nurturing" attitudes and emotional behavior; she couldnt see her capable of being commander-in-chief and what not. I think things like this are way more disconcerting and worth engaging with and more "dangerous" and indicative of larger trends, but thats just my prerogative

35 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

@ItsTommyBitch

Also, I think reducing candidates to one of their characteristics is the epitome of ignorance. 

When I see Obama I don't just see a black man. I see a Harvard graduate, a student of law, a president, an orator. 

When I see Clinton I don't just see a woman. I see a former first lady, secretary of state, someone with lots of experience. 

To accuse someone of racism or sexism for not voting for these individuals is far beyond ignorance.

It is the accusers who are reducing them to their race and sexxx. 

I'd argue its the definition of racism and or sexism as well

It's good that you personally don't see them as defined by these attributes, but that's actually what people are sometimes doing when they throw "you're only voting for her because shes a woman!" comments out; they are reducing whoever they are accusing's intellect by claiming that they don't care about the issues or their positions, etc. etc. which is just all kinds of presumptuous and rude

I don't think accusing someone of racism or sexism for not voting for these individuals is "beyond ignorance", i think its JUST ignorance; as in the non intentionally harmful kind. Because of all the grey area around people actually holding racist/sexist views against a candidate it's easy to also assume that other people must just be biased. Both are flawed ways of thinking and behaving to me. 

The way I see it, people are social creatures just trying to understand or failing to understand how others don't see what they see or believe; its a ridiculously everyday phenomenon that can be innocent in intention. Someone might see Clinton for a highly qualified, successful person and politician with a very appealing agenda and the means to get it done but not understand why a Democratic friend of theirs doesn't want to vote for her. They might think "Clinton has all the makings of a great president on paper, I can't think of any reason they don't want Clinton other than that they are sexist!" I don't think this is reducing Clinton to her gender so much as assuming the person they are accusing of doing that; They think the person is IGNORING all of her other traits and only seeing her as a "woman" and judging based on that because in their mind, the other aspects of her character are immensely more important in why they personally support her. It's just natural cognitive biases in play.

I'm no psychologist or anything, just my personal insight to what I think is more likely happening here  

[MJHolland 12,725]

57 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

 

 

Just a general reply.

I think you guys are conflating a few different issues that have similar shades of grey, but are in fact different.

First of all, it was never that if you were white and criticizing Obama you were racist, its the fact that there was (and still is) DEMONSTRABLE amounts of racism coming from lots of supposedly non-racist people that was not so subtly lobbed at Obama. Everything from the whole "birther" movement, his middle name and religion, his supposed "not actually black"ness, etc. There were tons of conspiracies and just disgusting thoughts and things like this that were publicized and popularized by the media that set the general public into a pretty gross racist frenzy in a really similar way to what has happened with Donald Trump; letting those bigoted in the general public feel safe coming forward with their racism and bigotry. It's just an added bonus that Donald Trump was ofc one of those public officials encouraging racism

There are some misguided people who DO paint issues too broadly. Obviously, sanders is not sexist. I don't think hes done or said a single thing sexist towards Hillary during his entire campaign. There are people who are voting for Hillary solely because she's a woman and who think that they can purposefully play this card to get those who are just ya know, slightly feminist minded to catch on and vote for her by demonizing Bernie. Hillary's campaign even played along in a kind of coy "No comment" kind of way. Hillary knows Bernie isn't sexist, but she's let it go on a few times up in the air for the controversy. This is true. Trying to ascribe this behavior as indicative of liberal behavior or... pc culture or "SJWs" or whatever is again painting what's really several different canvases with 1 brushstroke. It's about nuance.

About the sexism in general though, it's a combination of both. There IS a lot of sexism behind why some people don't want Hillary to be president, the same way there was a lot of racism behind why people didn't want Obama to be president and why they continued to oppose every. single. thing. he said or did during his 2 term presidency regardless of how effective or logical it was. They even opposed their OWN ideas if he said them to them  It's a legitimate concern. You only have to look at surveys to show that a good percentage of this country still believes a woman is not fit to run a country for a variety of reasons, and some of them SERIOUSLY believe that whole "they are too emotional, they have periods! What if they set off the launch codes!?" sexist drivel

That's millions of people  There's also a very very long history that still persists today about sexism in politics, especially in America. Hillary has been personally facing it all of her professional life.

Sexism and Racism DO play big parts in how people reacted to Obama and are reacting and WILL react to Hillary If/When she becomes President (). Yes, there are instances of people using this to garner favor or pretty much to generalize conservatives and opponents in general, like with Hillary not denying things about Bernie to up her female vote (though I can't think of anything Obama did that was ever like that  )

However, To suggest that its just a bunch of people throwing race or gender cards around to stir up controversy totally ignores the fact that it's a real, demonstrable problem with history. It's simple ignorance at best, intellectual dishonesty at worst.

I've never observed anyone, online or in person, that has even hinted they wouldn't vote for Clinton because she's a woman. Obama actually had LOTS of people who wouldn't vote for him because he was black. I don't think Hillary has that problem whatsoever. People won't vote for her because she's an awfully corrupt person. Period. 

[Burger 307]

1 hour ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

 

 

Just a general reply.

I think you guys are conflating a few different issues that have similar shades of grey, but are in fact different.

First of all, it was never that if you were white and criticizing Obama you were racist, its the fact that there was (and still is) DEMONSTRABLE amounts of racism coming from lots of supposedly non-racist people that was not so subtly lobbed at Obama. Everything from the whole "birther" movement, his middle name and religion, his supposed "not actually black"ness, etc. There were tons of conspiracies and just disgusting thoughts and things like this that were publicized and popularized by the media that set the general public into a pretty gross racist frenzy in a really similar way to what has happened with Donald Trump; letting those bigoted in the general public feel safe coming forward with their racism and bigotry. It's just an added bonus that Donald Trump was ofc one of those public officials encouraging racism

There are some misguided people who DO paint issues too broadly. Obviously, sanders is not sexist. I don't think hes done or said a single thing sexist towards Hillary during his entire campaign. There are people who are voting for Hillary solely because she's a woman and who think that they can purposefully play this card to get those who are just ya know, slightly feminist minded to catch on and vote for her by demonizing Bernie. Hillary's campaign even played along in a kind of coy "No comment" kind of way. Hillary knows Bernie isn't sexist, but she's let it go on a few times up in the air for the controversy. This is true. Trying to ascribe this behavior as indicative of liberal behavior or... pc culture or "SJWs" or whatever is again painting what's really several different canvases with 1 brushstroke. It's about nuance.

About the sexism in general though, it's a combination of both. There IS a lot of sexism behind why some people don't want Hillary to be president, the same way there was a lot of racism behind why people didn't want Obama to be president and why they continued to oppose every. single. thing. he said or did during his 2 term presidency regardless of how effective or logical it was. They even opposed their OWN ideas if he said them to them  It's a legitimate concern. You only have to look at surveys to show that a good percentage of this country still believes a woman is not fit to run a country for a variety of reasons, and some of them SERIOUSLY believe that whole "they are too emotional, they have periods! What if they set off the launch codes!?" sexist drivel

That's millions of people  There's also a very very long history that still persists today about sexism in politics, especially in America. Hillary has been personally facing it all of her professional life.

Sexism and Racism DO play big parts in how people reacted to Obama and are reacting and WILL react to Hillary If/When she becomes President (). Yes, there are instances of people using this to garner favor or pretty much to generalize conservatives and opponents in general, like with Hillary not denying things about Bernie to up her female vote (though I can't think of anything Obama did that was ever like that  )

However, To suggest that its just a bunch of people throwing race or gender cards around to stir up controversy totally ignores the fact that it's a real, demonstrable problem with history. It's simple ignorance at best, intellectual dishonesty at worst.

Thank Godt for this response. I am exhausted.

[Redstreak 6,653]

Amazing response. The only caveat I'd add is a reminder that in structural oppression, power imbalance is just as important to being a minority than size (responding to the person saying women couldn't be minorities because there are more of them)

 

oop was was supposed to have quoted @ItsTommyBitch In this

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

7 minutes ago, MJHolland said:

I've never observed anyone, online or in person, that has even hinted they wouldn't vote for Clinton because she's a woman. Obama actually had LOTS of people who wouldn't vote for him because he was black. I don't think Hillary has that problem whatsoever. People won't vote for her because she's an awfully corrupt person. Period. 

This is pretty anecdotal. There have been surveys, polls, and studies gauging women and minorities in politics, specifically situations around them winning the presidency. The questioning is very important and usually multiple questions are asked, so that's important to note, but usually with Women its things like, "Would you be willing to vote for a woman president?" and "Would you find a woman president trustworthy?" and "Do you think America is ready to have a woman president? There are also a few questions added as secondary ones like "How important is it to you that a woman is elected president?" or "Do you think having a woman president would be beneficial in a significant way?" etc. 

Really its a common set of questions that's polled every few months if you want to look for records of it. The number of people who believe America should have or would benefit from having a woman president has steadily risen over time, but a decade ago that number was not much above 50% in some categories, which is problematic to say the police.

Basic trends are real though and of every study and polling I've ever read the majority of people who don't think having a woman president is beneficial or important (or that America is quote en quote "ready" for one at all) comes from Republicans and Conservatives pretty much across the board. (When you break it down into other factors such as income, gender, race, it becomes much more nuanced) Interestingly enough, women and men have pretty similar rates of answering "No" to the country being "ready" to have a woman president, with sometimes women saying No more than men.

To the second bolded phrase, Some may believe this to be true, but I think its pretty hard to argue that this is the ONLY reason that people won't vote for Hillary, given all of the facts. Hillary was actually VERY popular at one time even after her presidential campaign loss and during her time as Secretary of State before Benghazi and she had great success at reaching across and appealing in a bipartisan manner; It's pretty clear that a lot of the current reasoning behind Hillary being seen as some sort of corrupt demon pawn (who is also exactly like her husband for some sexist reason  ) has to do with the email scandal and Benghazi (which wasn't her fault as many have already stated, but im not getting into that  )
 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

12 minutes ago, Redstreak said:

Amazing response. The only caveat I'd add is a reminder that in structural oppression, power imbalance is just as important to being a minority than size (responding to the person saying women couldn't be minorities because there are more of them)

 

oop was was supposed to have quoted @ItsTommyBitch In this

I figured.

Yeah I remember someone saying something about "Women aren't a minority" and I meant to say something about that, but I'm scatterbrained, ive been awake for like a day and a half  I'm weirdly MORE *nal-retentive when I'm tired  

You should see my disgustingly anguished drafting process for even writing a 3 line comment some days  

[Morphine Prince 109,683]

5 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

I figured.

Yeah I remember someone saying something about "Women aren't a minority" and I meant to say something about that, but I'm scatterbrained, ive been awake for like a day and a half  I'm weirdly MORE *nal-retentive when I'm tired  

You should see my disgustingly anguished drafting process for even writing a 3 line comment some days  

Ok, I meant that purely as a numerical thing. But women do have things that draw them back still in society. 

Don't want that comment to come off as me saying women aren't discriminated against  

 

[Redstreak 6,653]

1 minute ago, Morphine Prince said:

Ok, I meant that purely as a numerical thing. But women do have things that draw them back still in society. 

Don't want that comment to come off as me saying women aren't discriminated against  

 

I was talking about MJHolland

[MJHolland 12,725]

23 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

This is pretty anecdotal. There have been surveys, polls, and studies gauging women and minorities in politics, specifically situations around them winning the presidency. The questioning is very important and usually multiple questions are asked, so that's important to note, but usually with Women its things like, "Would you be willing to vote for a woman president?" and "Would you find a woman president trustworthy?" and "Do you think America is ready to have a woman president? There are also a few questions added as secondary ones like "How important is it to you that a woman is elected president?" or "Do you think having a woman president would be beneficial in a significant way?" etc. 

Really its a common set of questions that's polled every few months if you want to look for records of it. The number of people who believe America should have or would benefit from having a woman president has steadily risen over time, but a decade ago that number was not much above 50% in some categories, which is problematic to say the police.

Basic trends are real though and of every study and polling I've ever read the majority of people who don't think having a woman president is beneficial or important (or that America is quote en quote "ready" for one at all) comes from Republicans and Conservatives pretty much across the board. (When you break it down into other factors such as income, gender, race, it becomes much more nuanced) Interestingly enough, women and men have pretty similar rates of answering "No" to the country being "ready" to have a woman president, with sometimes women saying No more than men.

To the second bolded phrase, Some may believe this to be true, but I think its pretty hard to argue that this is the ONLY reason that people won't vote for Hillary, given all of the facts. Hillary was actually VERY popular at one time even after her presidential campaign loss and during her time as Secretary of State before Benghazi and she had great success at reaching across and appealing in a bipartisan manner; It's pretty clear that a lot of the current reasoning behind Hillary being seen as some sort of corrupt demon pawn (who is also exactly like her husband for some sexist reason  ) has to do with the email scandal and Benghazi (which wasn't her fault as many have already stated, but im not getting into that  )
 

If you want to talk research, it's statistically clear that WHEN women run, they are just as likely to win as men are. Talking about just the presidency is anecdotal.