Should we vote for women because they're women?

[Scomagia]

Ueah, "misogyny" is the reason Warren is a hopeless candidate.

How do you pronounce that?
And yes, a lot of it is. She has essentially the same policies as Bernie Sanders, a similar (if less extreme) personality, and is younger, yet Bernie is considered a strong candidate by many. The only thing working against her is a years-old "scandal" that a shitload of regular Americans have done and her gender.

Eh, its real guttural.

And no. She's low energy and, when she does muster enerfy, just seems shrill. Sanders, at least, appears enthused by his own policies. Maybe that's a bigger factor than her sex.

[Bear Stearns]

Her lack of support is not due to sexism. Some leftists don't view her to be as principled as Bernie.

Leftists are not a significant enough group in this country to matter.

The real danger is liberal corporatists. Neoliberals and neoconservatives. Warmongering psychopaths.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Its a big regret. I couldn't appreciate how good Trump could be. I'd say I'm a rare example of someone going from Never Trump to embracing Trump fully.

I went the same, he's the perfect accelerationist candidate and he's messed up his country so badly that the revolution is inevitable

The funny thing is that some on the most extreme elements of the far-right have a similar view.

[Galloism]

SJWs:

We should discriminate freely against anyone who we believe has been historically privileged, and they would just suck it up and deal with racism or sexism because we're doing it for the "oppressed class".

Far-Right:

Quit that shit. Also, let's get rid of all the muslims and hispanic people, Jews, Blacks, non-whites and implement a program of eugenics, genocide and institutionalised discrimination in our white only ethnostate because that will solve all our problems.

You missed a bit, comrade, so I fixed it for you smileyface

Ok. Yes, both are interested in institutionalized discrimination.

[Cekoviu]

How do you pronounce that?
And yes, a lot of it is. She has essentially the same policies as Bernie Sanders, a similar (if less extreme) personality, and is younger, yet Bernie is considered a strong candidate by many. The only thing working against her is a years-old "scandal" that a shitload of regular Americans have done and her gender.

Eh, its real guttural.

And no. She's low energy and, when she does muster enerfy, just seems shrill.

"She just seems shrill" is exactly the issue. I'm nearly certain that that is not something that you or many others would say about a male candidate.

[Page]

Diversity and equality are aspects of a good institutions, but diversity and equality do not automatically make a institution good. We should strive to dismantle oppressive hierarchies and oppressive institutions, and in doing so we will achieve diversity and equality. The problem is when a society thinks diversifying oppression is a step in the right direction. There is nothing to celebrate about a woman becoming the head of the CIA when that woman is a torturer. A woman becoming President is not progress if that woman wages imperialist wars and ignores people dying of poverty just like her male predecessors. It would not be any better for a war-profiteering company to be owned by a disabled, half black half Asian, pansexual, transgender person instead of a straight white male, as it is unjust for such an entity to exist.

Or to put it in terms of a meme:

Conservatives - Let's put Muslims in concentration camps.

Liberals - HIRE MORE WOMEN GUARDS

Reject the McFeminism that celebrates more women participating in oppression. Men and women and enby people unite to destroy oppression.

That's my manifesto.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

How do you pronounce that?
And yes, a lot of it is. She has essentially the same policies as Bernie Sanders, a similar (if less extreme) personality, and is younger, yet Bernie is considered a strong candidate by many. The only thing working against her is a years-old "scandal" that a shitload of regular Americans have done and her gender.

Eh, its real guttural.

And no. She's low energy and, when she does muster enerfy, just seems shrill. Sanders, at least, appears enthused by his own policies. Maybe that's a bigger factor than her sex.

Sexism is easier to complain about when a person's preferred candidate isn't winning.

[Irenton]

You missed a bit, comrade, so I fixed it for you smileyface

Ok. Yes, both are interested in institutionalized discrimination.

Most of IDPol is, I agree there

[Bear Stearns]

I went the same, he's the perfect accelerationist candidate and he's messed up his country so badly that the revolution is inevitable

The funny thing is that some on the most extreme elements of the far-right have a similar view.

Yes, because from a far-right perspective, Trump has been a yuuuuuuge let down. Immigration is up under him, crime is up, we're even more tied to Israel, and the only major policy promise he delivered on tax reform. He'll also probably deliver us gun control.

The only good thing about him (from a far-right perspective) is that he causing the establishment to go nuclear, which is very alienating to normal people. Faith in the system is collapsing.

[Bear Stearns]

Diversity and equality are aspects of a good institutions, but diversity and equality do not automatically make a institution good. We should strive to dismantle oppressive hierarchies and oppressive institutions, and in doing so we will achieve diversity and equality. The problem is when a society thinks diversifying oppression is a step in the right direction. There is nothing to celebrate about a woman becoming the head of the CIA when that woman is a torturer. A woman becoming President is not progress if that woman wages imperialist wars and ignores people dying of poverty just like her male predecessors. It would not be any better for a war-profiteering company to be owned by a disabled, half black half Asian, pansexual, transgender person instead of a straight white male, as it is unjust for such an entity to exist.

Or to put it in terms of a meme:

Conservatives - Let's put Muslims in concentration camps.

Liberals - HIRE MORE WOMEN GUARDS

Reject the McFeminism that celebrates more women participating in oppression. Men and women and enby people unite to destroy oppression.

That's my manifesto.

I'm the furthest thing from a leftist, but I find it odd that mainstream feminism is more about how to get more women CEOs.

As if that is the problem lol

[Nova Cyberia]

Eh, its real guttural.

And no. She's low energy and, when she does muster enerfy, just seems shrill.

"She just seems shrill" is exactly the issue. I'm nearly certain that that is not something that you or many others would say about a male candidate.

And Bernie sounds like a Jewish mom from Queens.

Trust me, his looks, voice, socialist views, and age turn plenty of people off, which is probably why he isn't going to win the nomination.

No one's discriminating against Warren because she's a woman. She's just a shit candidate.

[Irenton]

Diversity and equality are aspects of a good institutions, but diversity and equality do not automatically make a institution good. We should strive to dismantle oppressive hierarchies and oppressive institutions, and in doing so we will achieve diversity and equality. The problem is when a society thinks diversifying oppression is a step in the right direction. There is nothing to celebrate about a woman becoming the head of the CIA when that woman is a torturer. A woman becoming President is not progress if that woman wages imperialist wars and ignores people dying of poverty just like her male predecessors. It would not be any better for a war-profiteering company to be owned by a disabled, half black half Asian, pansexual, transgender person instead of a straight white male, as it is unjust for such an entity to exist.

Or to put it in terms of a meme:

Conservatives - Let's put Muslims in concentration camps.

Liberals - HIRE MORE WOMEN GUARDS

Reject the McFeminism that celebrates more women participating in oppression. Men and women and enby people unite to destroy oppression.

That's my manifesto.

That's pretty much my view there

[Luziyca]

The funny thing is that some on the most extreme elements of the far-right have a similar view.

Yes, because from a far-right perspective, Trump has been a yuuuuuuge let down. Immigration is up under him, crime is up, we're even more tied to Israel, and the only major policy promise he delivered on tax reform. He'll also probably deliver us gun control.

The only good thing about him (from a far-right perspective) is that he causing the establishment to go nuclear, which is very alienating to normal people. Faith in the system is collapsing.

To be honest, the one good thing Trump has done in my opinion is undermining American credibility on the world stage. If he wins in 2020, I can safely guarantee that Xi will become the world's head honcho: not the leader of the free world, of course, but certainly "leader of the world."

But I don't think this is the topic we're meant to be discussing.

[Bear Stearns]

Eh, its real guttural.

And no. She's low energy and, when she does muster enerfy, just seems shrill.

"She just seems shrill" is exactly the issue. I'm nearly certain that that is not something that you or many others would say about a male candidate.

There are plenty of women who aren't shrill sociopaths.

Tulsi Gabbard is a very pleasant person. Only leftist I follow on social media.

[Destriustan]

That is the most idiotic reason to vote for someone ever. We'd end up not electing qualified individuals simply because of their gender.

[Nova Cyberia]

Diversity and equality are aspects of a good institutions, but diversity and equality do not automatically make a institution good. We should strive to dismantle oppressive hierarchies and oppressive institutions, and in doing so we will achieve diversity and equality. The problem is when a society thinks diversifying oppression is a step in the right direction. There is nothing to celebrate about a woman becoming the head of the CIA when that woman is a torturer. A woman becoming President is not progress if that woman wages imperialist wars and ignores people dying of poverty just like her male predecessors. It would not be any better for a war-profiteering company to be owned by a disabled, half black half Asian, pansexual, transgender person instead of a straight white male, as it is unjust for such an entity to exist.

Or to put it in terms of a meme:

Conservatives - Let's put Muslims in concentration camps.

Liberals - HIRE MORE WOMEN GUARDS

Reject the McFeminism that celebrates more women participating in oppression. Men and women and enby people unite to destroy oppression.

That's my manifesto.

I'm the furthest thing from a leftist, but I find it odd that mainstream feminism is more about how to get more women CEOs.

As if that is the problem lol

It's funny, you know?

People always demand more female doctors and CEOs, but no one ever seems to demand more female trash collectors or janitors.

We only ever seem to need more women for the cushier jobs. They're fine with leaving manual labor and cleaning to men.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Eh, its real guttural.

And no. She's low energy and, when she does muster enerfy, just seems shrill.

"She just seems shrill" is exactly the issue. I'm nearly certain that that is not something that you or many others would say about a male candidate.

Evidence of that?

[Cekoviu]

Eh, its real guttural.

And no. She's low energy and, when she does muster enerfy, just seems shrill. Sanders, at least, appears enthused by his own policies. Maybe that's a bigger factor than her sex.

Sexism is easier to complain about when a person's preferred candidate isn't winning.

Warren isn't even my preferred candidate. I liked John Hickenlooper and Elizabeth Warren is not my current top pick - she is outclassed by Kirsten Gillibrand and Pete Buttigieg and tied with Bernie Sanders.

[Bear Stearns]

That is the most idiotic reason to vote for someone ever. We'd end up not electing qualified individuals simply because of their gender.

It's even worse when people vote for people solely because of race. Have you seen how incompetent the leadership in Baltimore is?

[Bear Stearns]

I'm the furthest thing from a leftist, but I find it odd that mainstream feminism is more about how to get more women CEOs.

As if that is the problem lol

It's funny, you know?

People always demand more female doctors and CEOs, but no one ever seems to demand more female trash collectors or janitors.

We only ever seem to need more women for the cushier jobs. They're fine with leaving manual labor and cleaning to men.

MORE WOMEN OIL RIG WORKERS

[Nova Cyberia]

It's funny, you know?

People always demand more female doctors and CEOs, but no one ever seems to demand more female trash collectors or janitors.

We only ever seem to need more women for the cushier jobs. They're fine with leaving manual labor and cleaning to men.

MORE WOMEN OIL RIG WORKERS

MORE FEMALE FARM WORKERS

[Scomagia]

Eh, its real guttural.

And no. She's low energy and, when she does muster enerfy, just seems shrill.

"She just seems shrill" is exactly the issue. I'm nearly certain that that is not something that you or many others would say about a male candidate.

It is in fact something I would say about a male candidate. I don't appreciate your insinuation there, pal.

[Cekoviu]

Ok. Yes, both are interested in institutionalized discrimination.

Most of IDPol is, I agree there

All politics are identity politics.jpeg.tar.gz

[Saiwania]

As I said, I hope Warren is the nominee. My prediction is that because the Democratic party decision makers desperately don't want Bernie Sanders, when the two primary finalists are Sanders and Warren, the DNC will "fix" things so that Warren wins and she'll go on to have a shrill campaign that doesn't have momentum, it'll crash and burn on election night and we'll have 4 more years of Donald Trump.

[Scomagia]

"She just seems shrill" is exactly the issue. I'm nearly certain that that is not something that you or many others would say about a male candidate.

Evidence of that?

None.