Hillary Clinton is the first woman ever to get the presidential nomination from a major political party in the history of the United States. This is, of course, a historic, and long overdue, moment. For many feminists, the nomination is a pretty straightforward, unambiguous victory for women and cause for celebration. For others, however, it’s complicated.
The "long overdue moment" is not the nomination of a female duopoly candidate, but when enough US voters elect a female third party candidate POTUS, as they have had the opportunity to do for several years.
"This movement (the revolution) will continue to grow" ? Not if Clinton is elected POTUS. She will do everything she can to vanquish the losers to assure that the June 2016 Sanders defection from the revolution was a bump in the road compared to what she will dole out.
Other than those two points, a very informative article.
Brilliant. Thanks Katie Halper for collecting and publishing these responses from strong feminist women who despise Hillary Clinton's policies and alliances. i wish every voter in the USA would read this, and seriously ponder long and hard.
Thank you, Ms. Halper for sharing a diverse number of views.
Mrs. Clinton's "brand of Feminism" to my way of thinking isn't Feminism at all...
It's one thing to raise the glass ceiling and another to do so while retaining the odious postures and policies of Patriarchal Capitalism (as Vandana Shiva wisely defines it).
Hey Katie, I really like your work. However, please don't buy into the LOTE BS pushed by Chomsky. Vote your conscience, even if it's close in New York. Trump is a Clinton stooge who is paving the way for her ascendancy, so a vote for either one is a wasted vote.
Again, follow your conscience!
Jill Not Hill 2016!
The title of this article could be WE WISH WE COULD EMBRACE DENIAL TO EASE THE PAIN EXPERIENCED BY MEDIUM TO HIGH INFORMATION VOTERS
Don't let Clinton SPOIL Jill Stein's opportunity to become the first female POTUS and reverse the decline of the 99%.
Vote Green in 16 !
Thank you for this article. I confess to not watching one moment of either convention - why would any thinking person subject themselves to the repubs- but made the conscious decision not to watch HRC's coronation. I am a 62 yr old woman who remembers the excitement of Geraldine Ferraro's nomination. I gathered my courage and approached,spoke to and shook hands with Gloria Steinem when she was in Philly for the VP debate that election season, what, more than 30 yrs ago.
However, I now feel nothing but dread and hopelessness with an impending HRC presidency, the same way I feel about most of Obama's other than his somewhat softened dealings with Iran and Syria. I'm appalled at Ms. Steinem's unthinking unfettered support for this most corrupt female politician.
Almost all of my usually thoughtful progressive friends are unquestioning in their support of her, simply because she's female. Any criticism of her foreign policy record brings protests that she's being held to a higher standard than the boys. They'd vote for her is she were running against the Pope.
Quite frankly, I'd vote for Bob Dole or even Richard Nixon ( who at least gave us OSHA, the EPA, and a mature relationship with China) before I'd vote for her. I'm not telling anyone I know, including my spouse, that I'm voting Jill Stein, or no one for President this year
"in which case I will vote for Clinton to stop Trump" - which is why, if you are EVER polled, make sure to say you will vote for Clinton, this can potentially boost Stein.
Please vote for Stein, it will not be a wasted vote!
Obtaining a nomination by illicit means, which Clinton has done, is not a victory for women.
Yes, yes! thank you for reminding everyone of this.
Having voted third party (to the consternation of friends and family) ever since experiencing the worst case of buyer's remorse after voting Clinton in 1992, I can assure anybody having doubts that you will feel very good after voting for Jill Stein.
The vitrol Hillbots are exhibiting against third party voters this year is exponentially worse than partisan vitrol of past elections, so my support for Stein will be strictly between me and the fly on the wall in keeping with Yasmin Nair mentioning, "revealing your voting choice in India is considered strange",
It could be worse. When I was travelling overland from Pakistan to Afghanistan during Pakistani elections during the seventies, many of my fellow travelers were Pakistanis leaving the country to avoid possible election spawned violent events. One Pakistani told me that revealing your choice in Pakistan could result in serious injury , or worse !
What everyone has to understand and quickly is that it doesn't matter so much that a woman has won the candidacy for a major party in the presidential race, what matters is that it is the right woman. Unfortunately what we know to date is that Mme. Clinton is not the right woman, she is a card carrying warmonger and elitist! She doesn't have one iota of concern for ordinary Americans, she is totally committed to the further enrichment of the 1%. If you can't see that, then you shouldn't be voting because you don't have the mental capacity to do so!
Excellent and accurate (IMO) critique of Hillary Clinton and her brand of corporate big-money politics - Thanks to Katie Halper!
The first woman president should have been a whole other body and mind. Clinton and her record (along with her partner in politics, Bill) of servitude to power interests have caused the impoverishment, imprisonment, inequality, servitude, death and displacement of millions of women, children, and men.
Our first woman president should have been a different woman and represented an entirely different world vision!
As a progressive woman, long-time Democrat and an elected official, I am experiencing the same angst. It has been a difficult decision for me to abandon my party and vote Green--but really, my party has abandoned me by choosing a candidate who does not reflect my democratic political and humanitarian views. Yes, I would like to see a woman president, but first I will vote for the candidate who I feel will make the world a better place. Jill Stein will receive my vote and I hope she will be able to participate in the presidential debates so her views will be more widely known. Thanks for an excellent article and comments--so nice to know I'm in good company!
This issue of some people voting for Hillary based upon her sex reminds me of a shocking mistake I once made. I was a suburban kid of twelve years old, who for some reason found himself in the heart of the city as the day grew late. How would I get home? Yes, there were buses out and about, but I had never ridden one. Suddenly approaching me was a bus with the words "France Avenue" in the front window. I leaped on board, because I lived not too far from France Avenue. Soon, I trusted, I would be safely home. But the bus kept going and going further into unfamiliar territory, and the sun by then had set. Where was this strange place, and why was I not yet home? So, I approached the bus driver to ask why he kept driving me further and further from France Avenue. He said "That's that's the road we're on now, and almost to the end of the line. Maybe you wanted France Avenue SOUTH? This is France Avenue NORTH." Aha! Right road, wrong direction, and now after dark, miles and miles from home, with the buses about to stop running for the night.
Ladies, don't put your lives in that same sort of spot, thinking you are 'almost home' with Hillary because she, too, squats to pee. There is much more to choosing a president than simply watching which restroom the person enters. Do some research before you blindly leap.
Please don't patronize us "ladies." At least HRC can imagine the true terror of a 12yo girl stranded "in the heart of the city as the day grew late." There's a lot more to being a woman than how one pees.
I'm sure both you and I can imagine the true terror a girl (or boy) can feel lost in the dark in a strange city, but can Hillary? Already on record are her actions of helping to destabilize Central America to the point that thousands of children were forced to flee ON THEIR OWN, hoping to somehow get to the safety of the USA, but once they arrived, Hillary said"'Send them back!" This may fit Hillary's (and your?) definition of womanhood, but it completely misses my definition of HUMANITY.
Whether HRC remembers being vulnerable or not is an entirely different question, and you missed my point entirely. I don't know your age, but when I was 12 (1965), living in Columbus OH, I was not allowed to get anywhere outside of the "safe" north end by myself. There's no way I could have found myself on a bus headed the wrong way through downtown. HRC is a few years older than I am, but I very much doubt she was permitted to stray out of Park Ridge toward Chicago as a preteen White girl. Pay attention to those last words, especially the very last one. Girls are vulnerable to rape, and in the 60s men like my Dad and Hugh Rodham were hypersensitive to that vulnerability and kept their little girls sheltered against it. They taught us a poorly defined but very real fear. Our brothers, on the other hand, ...
You continue to patronize me and other women with your tone and your refusal to recognize that there are differences in our experience. Yes, Central America at the turn of the 20th century matters, but even among those children, the vulnerability of the girls was far different from that of the boys. I suggest you stop trying to extrapolate and teach from your male experience and listen for a bit.