Let's get a handle on what TRUE sexism is, shall we?

Sexism is NOT holding a female candidate to the same standards that we would hold a male candidate to, sexism IS allowing exceptions for that female candidate simply because she is female.

I can imagine what this board would look like today if EITHER Obama or Edwards broke down on the stump, invoked the terror card, or discounted the work that MLK did.

Guess what? It would look the SAME as it does now--just inserting whichever candidate was foolish enough to do such things.

I'm sorry. As a feminist, I EXPECT Hillary to hang as tough as the other guys, not simply because she is a FEMALE candidate, but because she is a CANDIDATE for the highest stress job in the country.

Edit for spelling

But then I notice that whichever woman it is, it's always "that woman" that they don't like.

They say they treat women equally, but it's always "that woman" that they don't like.

That's my experience.

care to elaborate?

You are letting your true feelings shine through by even saying that
Treating Hillary like a damsel-in-distress is sexist too.
Amazing that folks just don't get it.

she hasn't gotten anywhere near as "shrill" or emotional as the guy you're supporting.

Why do you shoot yourself in the foot like this and turn people off?

Look, the "shrill" accusations with regard to Hillary that popped up months ago were clearly biased BS. I'm saying that as someone who has absolutely no intention of voting for Hillary. I don't pretend there is no bias against a given candidate just because he/she isn't my first choice (unlike so many others).

I'm sure a lot of others who aren't big fans of Hillary agree. Can you just not help yourself to have to go that extra step and take the cheap jab at Edwards and call HIM shrill?

I just don't get it.

Yes, thank you, exactly.

criticizing Edwards outfits..
or Obamas voice..
or Edwards hairstyles..
or Obamas emotion

although its hard to tell the difference around here..
but the mainstream media..
yeah..I am serious..

and I respect them highly.
If they were treated like this..I'd be quite upset.
you don't have to be a feminist to care about females.

progressed as fast as it did in the seventies without them-people like you.

I think of the equality and choice principles of feminism as benefitting men too. One man in my family has been able to pursue his work as an inventor because his wife has taken on the task as major breadwinner while he works on his project and spends time with their child. If she wasn't able to command a good salary, he would not be able to follow him dream.

So , thanks.

You might also read up on the Starr Investigation.

and your implications are totally lost. What, pray tell, does the Starr report have to do with feminism?
Because I don't LIKE Clinton's policies, I am sexist.
YOU'VE GOT A LONG WAY TO GO, BABY!:eyes:

it might piss me off.
I've earned my status as a feminist and wear it proudly. Reading would do YOU some good...but I am pretty certain that point is lost on you.

I know all about who you are.
You can move along now.

said? Would you praise her, or damn her for being weak and secretive?

I don't see why this surprised anyone that this happened to a (any) candidate. I just don't get the big deal.

Everyone of are top contenders are working hard - though I'm not for Hillary - I would give here a break Not because she a women!!! but this is getting down to the wire and mistakes can happen and will and want to hear who Idea's are best - instead dragging into name calling!!!

Lets not turn this into Sexist or Racist thing Yet (might need it when THE Real Racist / Sexist stuff comes at them? (from the Re-pig's side)

Charges of "sexism" have become the standby response to pardon all of Hillary's gaffs.

Enough is enough.

on a big macho boy's truck that reads: "Life's a bitch. Don't vote for one!" and finding that funny. I have a repub friend who is fiercely feminist but she found that very funny. I found it very insulting to women. I don't care for Hillary but that was just wrong and misogynistic.

However, it is not going after her for crying. Remember, the media did the EXACT same thing to Sen. Muskie when he was running for the nomination. Hell, they did the same thing to Kerry in '04. If Obama and Edwards had been choked up like that, the media would've run with it. Face it, crying makes you look weak, whether you're male or female and the media is always looking to pounce on the weakest link. That does not, however, justify their actions...but I do not believe they're going after her more because of her sex.

Just like I don't think Hillary is hitting Obama hard because she's a racist.

sexism is the double standard Clinton is held to here. She's too cold. Oops, now she's too emotional. She's too tough. Oops, now she's too weak. She's hung every fucking bit as tough and then some. There was nothing wrong with her becoming emotional today. She was hardly out of control. And emotion from Obama or Edwards or Kucinich wouldn't bother me either.

I heard her. She didn't break down. And it's quite interesting that you choose to frame it in that right wing way. Nor did she discount MLK's work. And in fact, she was fucking right. It did take a president to actually get through the Civil Rights Act. It took MLK to awake the conscience of a nation and it took LBJ to ram the legislation through.

Furthermore, Edwards made some very sexist comments and he gets a free ride. Todd Gitlin said his remarks made him ashamed to be a man today. A former blogger for Edwards switched her support from Edwards to Obama because of Edwards remarks, but DU? Nope, too busy hammering Clinton.

I don't think you understand anything about what sexism is.

spit nails.