- Oct 25, 2017
I'm going to blow your mind, but it's possible to be objectively critical of anyone, including Hillary Clinton — especially her, since she's had such a long and public career, mired in both legitimate and illegitimately manufactured controversy — while recognizing that much of the criticism of her and people like Nancy Pelosi is influenced in large or small part by Republicans' multi-decade propaganda campaigns against them. Those began because said women were talented and dangerous to Republican agenda, but crucially were successful because of our society's propensity to fall prey to sexism.People have been criticizing Hillary for years but they’d get shouted down as being sexist (similar to how Auto tried to say that yelling back YAAAS QUEEEEN was a homophobic dog whistle) or influenced by the right-wing media. That effectively shut the conversation down. It’s only now that these criticisms are being heard and taken seriously.
The incessant cavalcade of drive-bys that accompanies any thread about a female politician, Hillary or not, is rooted in sexism. The rhetoric of "go away" is sexism, because it isn't mirrored against male presidential candidates. Regardless of whether you agree with Autodidact's position on "YAAAS QUEEN!" (which IMO is indisputably rooted in LGBT pop culture, and thus has homophobic connotation), such posts are low effort drive-bys that are unproductive.
Generally, when there are things to be objectively critical of Hillary on, even her supporters do so. This thread is a prime example of that. It just so happens that there a bunch of other threads for news about her that are predicated on misquotations, deliberately misunderstanding her, sexist rhetoric, etc.