I am a woman. So what? Give me issues.

I am a woman. So what? Give me issues.

If I hear one more woman say or read one more woman write that we “as women” need to vote for Hillary Clinton because she is a woman and it is about time “to have a woman in office”, I am going to burn my bra and mail it to them. I am just as offended by any woman saying that they would vote for a person based on gender as I am a man saying do not vote for Hillary because she is a woman. Would it be good to have a woman in office? Of course. History making. Will I base a vote on GENDER alone? Hell no!

Is that how we want to vote? Seriously? Then, let’s just take all of the names off of the ballot. We shall vote Penis or NO Penis. (Dangling Chad or No Dangling Chad)

My point, any person– male or female– who would base a vote for the President of the United States based on gender (or race or looks or anything that has nothing to do with issues) really needs to re-evaluate their reasons for voting at all.

I am not Hillary bashing here. I am “Woman Power Hear Me Roar Without Looking at What Issues Are Important To ME but At Gender Alone” bashing. If Hillary stands on the issues where you would like your next president to stand, vote for her. If not, take that damn gender card and throw it out and vote for the candidate that YOU are most aligned with when it comes to ISSUES.

Vote for the issues, people. Not the Penis (or lack thereof). I work with many Democratic, liberal feminists who are very intelligent and well spoken. I have even heard a few of them say they would/should vote for Hillary in order to get a woman into office. I sincerely hope I am missing the part of that where they add….”because I agree with her on her politics.”

I don’t get into politics here on this blog. I don’t want to argue them. I am more angry about the fact that I am hearing intelligent women saying things that shock me. I am not a political blogger or a political expert. In fact, I can honestly tell you that I have no idea exactly whose ring I am throwing my hat into right now. Given a choice and having to make that decision RIGHT THIS INSTANT, I know who I would lean towards, but that is my decision. And guess what? I am basing it on the issues that are important to me. Not on woman power. (Hear me gag.)

31 thoughts on “I am a woman. So what? Give me issues.

  1. Great post–I came over because of the post LawyerMama and CityMama referred to at MOMocrats too.

    I think the mainstream media just can’t wrap their teeny little heads around the idea that women vote on and care about issues too. Just like men! Fancy that.

    But what’s really annoying is to be told you aren’t a good feminist by other women if you aren’t voting for Clinton. Never mind that her voting record and platform might not mesh with your own priorities as a voter!


  2. Thank you! A commenter over at MOMocrats mentioned your post and I had to come check it out. I’m getting really sick of being told that I have to vote for the woman because I’m a woman. It’s like telling me I need to vote for the shortest candidate because I’m short. Or the candidate with the birthday closest to mine. Are there any Libras running? LOL!

  3. In a perfect world, we wouldn’t judge anyone that way (i.e. based only on their gender or race) but unfortunately, people judge people everywhere, everyday for all reasons and you’d be surprised how often people receive a job, scholarship, promotion, get recognized, etc. all because of their gender or race. People always highlight something that might be a tad outside the norm. I mean wasn’t there a big study out there somewhere that said some people actually chose a candidate based on their looks. Their looks! How shallow…and sad but for some, even unconsciously, that might have been true.

  4. I can see where you are coming from but I also think that it’s important to consider why many women are saying that they will vote for her because she is a woman. If you look at the Democratic candidates’ positions on many of the key issues in this election, their differences are few and far between. So John Edwards is anti-gun control while Obama and Clinton are for a national registry, and their plans for healthcare, new energy policy, getting out of Iraq are slightly different, basically, they are all saying pretty much the same thing. If you watched the MSNBC debates on Jan. 15th, you might have caught the question about how to choose a candidate when their platforms were so similar. Obama emphasized his general message of unity, Clinton her ability to act on day one, Edwards his distaste for lobbyists. Most voters will listen to their general messages but also consider personality, face and other personal attributes.

    How many times have we read about Obama’s “charisma”? I would hardly vote for someone based on that, just as I would hardly vote for a woman because I am also a woman.

    The unfortunate thing is that many people will NOT vote for her because she is a woman. And I think that is at the heart of many of the statements you hear from women in the media.

  5. Ok, I’m commenting again because I just read this again and I must have missed the Penis vs. No Penis line the first time around. LAUGHED OUT LOUD. Awesome post!!!

  6. I’m with you on having no idea where I’ll end up in the election, but…it would sure be nice to get unbiased coverage so we can make intelligent decisions when the time comes. (What in the heck did they do prior to TV/DVR/DVD/technology in general?).

    One additional point is this…why did Clinton’s teary-eyed moment get so much play? And why was it so pivotal? One reporter even said it was THE reason she won the primary! Newsflash – candidates are human! Next thing you know, we’ll be hearing…A male hopeful won the primary because he flex’ed his left bicep while making a point — it’s just as ridiculous!

  7. You know… this reminds me of the people who voted for W just because “they wanted a Christian in office”. Hello???? Can the person do the job???? We need to take politics more seriously in this country and actually evaluate the type of job a candidate will do, not what group or religion or race or gender to which they belong.

    WHEW… needed to add my .02 there! Feel better… stepping off soap box…

    PS – Love the references to hanging chads or no hanging chads. Brilliant!

  8. I totally agree – what is important is what the candidate stands for, believes in and is passionate about!

    Unfortunately I think it’s slim pickins this year!

  9. You go girl! This same discussion is taking place like crazy on a Women and Media (also known as WAM!) listserv I’m on – everyone is struggling I think – either to understand the reason for the distinction, to protest against it or to talk about the idealistic attractiveness of The Opposition. The thing I believe, as someone Hillary’s age, is that our experiences were so tough so often that we are grateful for such a worthy standard bearer. At the same time, the inspirational and youth-attracting rhetoric and persona of Obama makes many older feminists kind of guilty I think. I wrote this about it. But remember, we see ourselves as idealists — and now there’s this new one — and he’s a running against the first woman and.. and…
    Anyway, the conversation is valuable and this contribution, as usual, a good one. Happy New Year!!!

  10. There was a boy named Chad in my class in 2000; he had dimples, too. He wasn’t “hanging” or “dangling”, but it was tempting to make it so at times. But the gender issue? Aren’t most women smart enough to choose on issues and not on penises or boobs? I hope so. We women have brains. Let’s use them.

  11. I wrote
    after hearing the 10th woman on NPR say exactly what you’re bitching about.

    I’m now considering deleting my post and inserting your. [I kid!]

    Well said; bravo!

  12. Oh, if this is bothering you, you should read the clap trap that Brian Williams wrote (no I will not link to it), where he basically says that the people of New Hampshire voted for Hillary because the media was being mean to her!

    But as some people have said above me here, it is a sad state of affairs but true of the country we apparently live in right now.

    Huckabee wins in Iowa… why? Because he is an Evengelical Christian.

    Obama gets a huge surge in the polls because “Oprah Winfrey said so.”

    Hillary is not “emotional enough” (Usually followed by, “She is too emotional”)

    John Kerry wasn’t a “good candidate” for President, because he was too book smart and boring. (Yeah, because we don’t want those book smart guys running the country when we could have a beer swillin’ cowboy)

    Al Gore was “too stiff”

    Useless reasons to vote for (or against) somebody is now the norm, for far too many people.

  13. heh heh. dangling chad. that’s a good one. but, i’ve had your thoughts exactly (except on the chads) and agree 100% with what you’re saying.

  14. I also thing one of my dogs could do a better job in the Oval Office, but I wouldn’t expect all dog lovers to vote for one of them. ๐Ÿ™‚

  15. I totally agree with you! Race & gender should not influence anyones vote, unless you are hiding under a rock and don’t care about your country.

  16. Dangling Chad….. OMG! I can’t get past this….. I am so going to start using that.

    As for the voting I am Australian so don’t get a vote for technically the leader of the world.

    Don’t stuff it up people. We implore you.

  17. I couldn’t agree more. But sadly that isn’t the world we live in. And so many people are looking at her gender and the color of Barack’s skin as reasons not to vote for them.

    I really hope that we as a country do look at a person’s politics for once. It would be a nice change from the past 8 craptacular years.

  18. I SO agree with you. Isn’t it about time we stop discussing gender (or race for that matter) and just talk about the ISSUES? (wow! what a concept!)

    I think it’s about damn time to break the whole “White Male President” thing, but not for the wrong reasons.

    I like Julie’s comment about finding a candidate to vote FOR instead of one to not vote AGAINST. How true!!!

  19. Good for you. And I agree. And everything Cassie, Julie, Moogie and Deb have said.

    I hate that we, as human beings, even have to consider the gender of our candidate.

    Thanks for a timely post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *