I just read the most annoying article in VG (piece of shit 'newspaper' that unfortunately is the biggest selling in the country) during my lunch break an hour ago. Let's see if I can find it in their online edition (I almost never read that because it has the most annoying layout ever and they only write about bs anyway) ... Yeah, here it is. Sheesh.
Brief recap of the article: some stupid cow who thinks she's a Democrat is soo disappointed that Hillary wasn't nominated. Boo fucking hoo. She says she will never vote for Obama, never ever in a million years. She's going to vote for McCain instead. *facepalm* 'I am a proud Hillary Clinton-Democrat' my shiny metal ass. How stupid can one person get? And they're saying that it's a sexist thing, that it's because of sexism Clinton wasn't chosen, it's just because Obama's a man.
For the record: I am a woman. I consider myself a feminist. I belong on the left side of the spectrum politically (and should any Americans read this: by 'left' I mean the European left, not the perceived American left ;-), I am a social democrat. I vote Labor. Although I did actually vote for Red Alliance in last year's local elections, but that was just a fluke.
I recently posted about how the Republicans must be stupid, but going by this, Democrats can't be far behind. And ignorant too. Someone among these people - McCain-supporting 'Democrats' - is quoted as saying that Clinton as the nominee would have been historic. Well, read your own goddamn history, then! Over the course of the civil rights movement in the US, one pattern is conspicuously clear: the blacks conquer new territory first, then the women follow. First blacks, then women. Seriously. It is completely normal for there to be a black male president first, and then, at some later stage, a female one of whichever color. Oh, sorry, whatever. >:-)
And now to the real point I'm trying to make here. OK, so it's sexist that Obama was picked over Clinton. That's what they're saying, some of these people. Not all of them, but some. A great opportunity for American women, yada yada. Yalla yalla. :-) And because of that, they will not vote for Obama, but for McCain instead. Doing so is
1) STUPID. To the extent that Clinton's politics diverges from McCain's, he opposes her rather strongly and will do things she would not. So these people
1b) DON'T CARE ABOUT CLINTON'S POLITICAL VIEWS. They are so willing to let someone with different views and goals take over. Just out of sheer spite. So they don't care about what Clinton's trying to achieve politically. Rather revealing IMO.
Finally, this is
Obama only won because he's a man, so they don't want to vote for him because it should have been a woman instead, sniffle. In other words, are they only rooting for Clinton because she's a woman?? Politically, these two candidates are almost identical, as far as I can tell. So what these people are doing is just as sexist as they're accusing others of being. Support the woman no matter what?? How is that not just as wrong as supporting the man no matter what??
Equal rights does not mean special consideration for women. It means that both sexes are considered equally. Maybe what these people are really griping about is the fact that their candidate was beaten fair & square - that she came up against someone better and lost. Because having equal rights in a society (which the US doesn't have, and hardly any other country in the world either, but that's another story) does not mean that women will, or should, always come out on top.
Sometimes a man will be more competent and popular than a woman in the same situation. Deal with it.
2 weeks ago