Say, How Could Sexxxxxism Hurt Hillary During The Debates?

The media and their Democrat comrades have long attempted to set the conditions where if Hillary loses, it will be do to outside factors having nothing to do with her. It won’t be due to her being a horrible, horrible candidate. It won’t be because she’s rather boring. Or because people are worried about her health. Or that her polices are bad for the middle and lower classes. Or that people who think she is Obama’s third term, having watched the blase economy, the dictatorial style of Obama, how Ocare is failing, the terrible foreign policy, etc. It won’t be due to her being bad at connecting with people. She just doesn’t have that certain something that people like Bill Clinton, Obama, and others have. Nope. It’s sexxxxxism. Now Anna Waters attempts to say if she loses the debate, it will be due to sexxxxxism

How could sexism hurt Clinton in the debates? These female high school debaters know.

Yes, that is correct, Ms. Waters is actually making the case of sexxxxxism towards Hillary by using high school kids. Nothing says “ready to be president of the United States” like being compared to high school females, because, we all know how stable teenagers (male or female) tend to be.

On the national stage, another woman has been battling the gendered perception of what it is to be “presidential,” both in debates and on the campaign trail. “I just don’t think she has a presidential look, and you need a presidential look,” Donald Trump declared this month of his opponent, Hillary Clinton, the second time in two days he’d expressed skepticism about Clinton’s “presidential” appearance and the umpteenth time Clinton has faced gendered mockery. Her political rivals and a cadre of pundits, on the left and the right, have taken her to task for the way she presents herself in debates and speeches — her voice, her clothing, her level of emotion — in a way that resonates with a group far from the world of national politics: female high school debaters. As a former high school debater who now coaches, I know something about how Clinton will be judged when she takes the debate stage against Trump on Monday night.

Ms. Waters is a junior at Northwestern University. Surprisingly, she is majoring in journalism, not Women’s Studies. Still means she’s a leftist, though. So, of course, this is what presidential looks like

The female high school debaters I know have been belittled by male opponents and told to shush. Judges and parents call these young women naggy, shrill and even bitchy. They’re told to smile more and sometimes get more in-depth criticism of their hem length than their argumentation. Isabelle Bavis, a junior at Evanston Township High School in Illinois, who has been called “screechy” on ballots, puts it simply: “The language they use to correct us is not the same language used when correcting the boys.”

Welcome to the Real World, honey. Oh, wait, sorry, that was misogynistic. My bad. Well, not really. Anyhow, no worries about Hillary being her typical shrill self. She’s either

or looks like death warmed over

Or her eye is wandering. Or she’s yelling at people. Or, she’s apparently akin to a high school female with raging hormones (whoops, that’s a paternalistic saying), which is exactly what we need for president, AmIRight? Because the opinion piece goes on and on and on like a women in a shoe store (sorrynotsorry), getting to

Many female debaters have learned to modulate their voices and temper their emotions to win within this structure, something Clinton discussed doing in a recent interview with Humans of New York. Ella Fanger, a senior at Oakwood School in Los Angeles, says she has to moderate her tone to resist falling into gendered traps.

Uh, yeah, men do this too. In fact, huge numbers of people do this in all facets of life. There are classes in speech, tone, and boy language modification. Would you buy a car from someone who sounds bored, screechy, obnoxious, or too loud? It annoys the hell out of me when football analysts are constantly talking so loud as to almost be yelling. I rather tune them out. Would you trust your doctor if they were were shrill, male or female? Would you want some who looks like death warmed over touching you?

“Clinton faces similar challenges in terms of trying to both confront stereotypes but at the same time being weirdly beholden to them, because she needs voters to vote for her in the same way I need a judge to vote for me,” Fanger says. “I don’t have full freedom to fight the patriarchy in the way I want to because it’s a competitive activity. I’m in that room to get the ballot.”

Which, come November, is exactly what another woman seeks to do. And whether or not these young debaters want Clinton to be president, they are hoping her candidacy helps change what it means to be a woman in debate — and what it means to be “presidential.”

Let’s boil it down: if she loses, well, it’s that darned patriarchy and sexxxxxism. Not Clinton collapsing on 9/11, not her inibility to walk a flight of stairs without help, and certainly not that she’s just a terrible candidate who would be getting slaughtered if a portion of the GOP hadn’t gotten Donald Trump to be the GOP nominee. This is simply setting the stage for Blamestorming if she blows the first debate.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

18 Responses to “Say, How Could Sexxxxxism Hurt Hillary During The Debates?”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Dems recognize that Secretary Clinton is an uncomfortable, mediocre (being generous) retail politician with 30 yrs of negative publicity etched into the public’s minds.

    Conservative apparatchiks would be committing political malpractice if they didn’t use her political negatives at every turn.

    The primary difference between Repub/cons and Dem/libs is policy. Repubs prefer an America more like the 90s – the 1890s. Dems prefer the European style welfare state. Repubs believe that unwavering support of the wealthy leads to a better America. Dems prefer a bottom up approach.

    Trump is a natural showman, hence an attractive politician. He’s been slowly adopting conservative-like positions over the past couple of years to support his campaign. He’s a natural and lifelong salesman so he can lie to your face without flinching, since he believes his own lies.

    Conservatives support him because he is much more likely (at this time) to support the policies they prefer. Trump would most likely sign extremist right-wing legislation – Clinton would not. It’s thought Trump would nominate more malleable supreme court justices.

    What were the GOP voters thinking. Any number of more qualified, more conservative Repub candidates would have easily beaten Clinton.

    Clinton will lose the debate, Trump is too agile. She’s forgotten more policy than Trump can ever hope to know at his age, but debates are not about style as interpreted by film critics pundits. Trump can only lose by doing something really, really stupid, and KellyAnne Conway has kept him pretty much neutered these past few weeks. And the new political pundits don’t just truthfulness or policy, but only judge on style points.

    Maybe the Clinton campaign can unnerve him by having the little girl he raped when she was only 13 sitting in the front row.

  2. drowningpuppies says:

    Maybe the Clinton campaign can unnerve him by having the little girl he raped when she was only 13 sitting in the front row.

    The little miss goldpuss who’s more retarded than john award*
    *To be awarded daily

    Nominations now closed for today, we have a winner.

  3. Conservative Beaner says:

    Hoagie,

    I would almost suggest the same thing but since Hillary cares only about herself I don’t think it would work.

    May I suggest Doctors and Nurses in scrubs along with a crash cart loaded with IV bags and syringes with vitamin “B12”.

  4. Hoagie says:

    Or a wheelchair ramp?

  5. Hoagie says:

    Think of the excitement generated among the leftists here. The very first person with lady parts, in a wheelchair, in a dubious relationship with another woman, Huma, who herself is a moslem spy married to a Jewish pervert elected president of the crumbling republic.

  6. Jeffery says:

    pinkpoodle,

    It’s not fair to declare yourself the winner, although we all agree with your choice.

    http://www.cosypajamas.com/uploadfile/products/20130310/2.jpg

  7. Jeffery says:

    pinkpoodle,

    Check this picture carefully, it’s Hoagie’s facebook picture. Is this the bad doggie that “hurt” you at the “Furry” party? I thought so.

    https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=adult+dog+costumes+for+humans&view=detailv2&&id=9E44F2616A5088A467BFCFA1408C3DD25A112D17&selectedIndex=23&ccid=4h5mCRJh&simid=608037859838395811&thid=OIP.Me21e66091261f9e3d3a283d93a7364a0o0&ajaxhist=0

  8. Liam Thomas says:

    It will be interesting if Hillary can actually stand for 90 minutes.

    That will be the real presidential test….If she does not die in that 90 minute debate…turn out the lights….Hillary is the Next Prez. The polling averages dont lie….she consistently polls ahead of The Donald almost everywhere….despite polls now and then that have trump up etc.

  9. Hoagie says:

    You made me look like a deranged Chihuahua. Mission accomplished!

  10. Dana says:

    “Twasn’t that long ago that the lovely Mrs Clinton didn’t return in time from a bathroom break to make the second part of a debate. Can you imagine if she has some sort of health-related episode up on the big stage?

    Of course, most people’s minds were made up, long ago; the candidates are battling for only a small slice of the undecideds.

  11. Yes, nothing makes Hillary look more presidential than comparing her to a high school girl railing against the patriarchy. LOL! It’s always something else that takes the blame. Progressives are the leading manufacturer of excuses. They blame the man, whitey, patriarchy, RWC, racism, sexism, etc.

  12. Jeffery says:

    Trump “wins” the debate if he doesn’t physically assault Secretary Clinton, like he did one of his ex wives.

    No one expects Trump to know anything. He’s going to make America great again and destroy ISIS. Rinse and repeat for 90 min. He’ll mug for the camera, and Roger Ailes will have given him a few bon mots to toss out. He’ll talk about the Clinton/Obama economy which everyone except the economists know is bad.

    Trump’s challenges are having short pithy responses to his weak spots: tax returns, Trump Foundation, Russian mob/Putin/oligarchs, temperament, ignorance of the world. This is precisely what Ailes is there to manage – supplying Trump with clever 30 sec responses to defuse these for casual viewers. “Are you better off than you were 8 years ago?” “There you go again…” Any question about the Trump Foundation ends up trashing the Clinton Foundation etc.

    This is just another reality show episode for Donnie. He’s good at it.

  13. Jeffery says:

    Shadow,

    Just think – you could shut up liberals forever by merely ending racism, sexism, bigotry and xenophobia! Time to get to work!

  14. Dana says:

    Jeffrey wrote:

    Just think – you could shut up liberals forever by merely ending racism, sexism, bigotry and xenophobia! Time to get to work!

    Well, the left have been trying this, and mostly getting their way on policy, for 52 years now, for two generations, and we see just how well their policies have worked.

    And after 7½ years of our First Black President, it seems as though race relations have gotten worse, not better. How have liberal policies of treating races differently, through Affirmative Action, ‘safe spaces’ and other racial preferences helped to end racism and bigotry?

  15. Dana says:

    I remember how the Communists enforced ethnic integration in Yugoslavia, and there was peace and love and harmony between the Serbs and the Bosnians and the Kosovars and the Croats, all living together as friends. Then, after Marshall Tito went to his eternal reward, the country came up with some weird rotating federal presidency, and when it was time for Slobodan Milosevic to step down, he refused. After two generations of (enforced) peace and harmony, the Serbs and the Croats and the Bosnians and the Kosovars apparently needed very little impetus to start hating each other again, killing and maiming until Hell was running out of room.

    Perhaps you remember the famous picture of starving Bosnian prisoners, so very reminiscent of photos from the Nazi concentration camps?

    You and I probably couldn’t tell a Bosnian from a Serb or a Croat just by looking, but they can, and it was enough to inflame ethnic strife. Those different ethnic groups weren’t nearly as different amongst themselves as blacks and whites are in the US, but the differences were enough on which to base hatred.

    It just might be the case that we cannot end “racism, sexism, bigotry and xenophobia,” because they just might be so hard-wired into human nature that they are simply not subject to change.

  16. Hoagie says:

    There may be another reason we cannot end “racism, sexism, bigotry and xenophobia” and that is because in some instances they are correct. Maybe, just maybe when you keep pushing a line of bu11$hit people know isn’t true like “all cultures are equal” they respond with some “ism” or another. Or when we’ve wasted trillions into a “war on poverty” and instead of eliminating poverty merely succeeded in generationalizing it it’s time for another approach.

    It amuses me that only white people can be all those isms and phobias because when other than whites do it’s social justice. So isms and phobias are okay as long as they’re directed at the politically correct target. For example moslems belong to a theocratic cult that believes in murdering non-moslems but if I don’t want them here because of it I’m the bigot. So believing it’s okay to murder me because I’m Christian is not bigoted but throwing them out because of it is. Huh?

  17. Liam Thomas says:

    @Jeffery

    Your so funny.

    do you really think that Obama understood shit when he entered the white house….He was a senator for 2 years who spent 1.5 of those years campaigning non stop.

    He didnt and still doesnt know shit…..what he does is delegate his authority to many, many policy people around him and expect them to know shit.

    That is what Trump will have to do….Its not like the Donald is going to Chicago and set up a task force and personally run it.

    So I find Your comments amusing and filled with desperation….the thought of the Donald being Prez to you is about as sickening as the thought of 8 years of Cheatin, lyin Hillary with the bimbo chaser Bill back as first gentleman has been to those on the right.

Pirate's Cove