Tuesday, July 12, 2016

Toxic Feminism in the 2016 Election (6/22/16)

Okay, let’s face it, the only reason I’m focusing so much on feminism is the 2016 election. I’ve discussed a lot of these points before, but I decided I wanted to focus more exclusively on this matter before moving on. The thing is, the toxic feminism in the 2016 election is subversive, divisive, and stops people from being able to adequately discuss the issues. It is essentially a form of poisoning the well. It attempts to discredit and since critics of certain candidates (most notably Hillary Clinton) and give the preferred candidate moral high ground and control of the debate.

So imagine you’re a Bernie supporter in the 2016 election. You like Bernie Sanders. You don’t like Clinton. Your number one priorities are getting money out of politics and fixing a broken economy. You ask Hillary about her policies, her ties to Wall Street, whether she will follow through in helping the lower and middle classes, or whether she will be a tool for the 1%. Legitimate questions given her ties, her ideology, her inconsistencies in her platform.

Then it happens. You’re accused of sexism. Your debate opponent goes on about how historic it is that we’re nominating the first woman president, and that these accusations are sexist because they would not happen to a man. You’re taken aback, dumbfounded, and even offended. Sexist?! I just want a good honest candidate who will stand up for the the 99%!

Well, let’s look at what just happened here. You start out with a critique on substance. You are accused of being sexist. The shift goes away from Hillary’s history, her consistency, her loyalties, and focuses on her sex. Hillary being nominated is historic because she’s a woman. You not liking this woman means you’re a sexist.
A few things happened here.

1) You concerns were downplayed. Your concerns no longer are the focal point of debate. They dodged them. This is intentional in my opinion, and it’s subversive. Just as feminist theory looks at the power relations and inequalities between sexes, conflict theory with an emphasis on class consciousness will show that a big tool the 1% uses to keep people in check is divide and conquer strategies. Race and sex differences are often played upon in order to set people against each other, because nothing scares the crap out of the ruling class like a united electorate who has their sights set on changing things. Racial differences are a favorite among the elites to exploit, and animosity between blacks and whites is often inflamed with the core purpose of turning them against each other and keeping them away from the rich. We saw this in the post slavery days and we even saw this with dog whistle politics. Arguably it took place this election too with Sanders being characterized as a white male’s candidate. Back to sexism, it’s the same thing. By focusing on sex and accusing people of sexism, it downplays the concerns and divides people, bypassing your concerns directly and putting you on the defensive.

2) It slanders your character. Accusations of criticisms are sexist mean you yourself are accused of being sexist if you make the same criticisms by proxy. Some people will try to dance around this fact, trying to make the fact that you see the accusation of sexism as evidence that you are in fact sexist, but let’s face it, this is a well placed trap that exists to make you look bad. This diverts the debate away from the issues and onto defending yourself from attacks. You basically open yourself up to criticism, and guess what, your concerns aren’t heard because the well is poisoned.

3) The focal point of the debate changes. I already discussed this above. The debate is no longer about you and your concerns. It’s now about sexism. Congratulations of getting sucked into a crappy debate you didn’t want to have.

Honestly, it just sickens me. We have real issues in this country right now, and I resent having to spend so
much time discussing feminism. As I said before, I am a feminist. I am for equality. I sympathize with the concerns, but holy crap, these are really dirty campaign tactics. The real purpose of this toxic feminism in the election, this focus on Hillary’s womanhood and the alleged sexism of detractors is to silence dissent. A lot of people don’t like Hillary, a lot of people don’t want Hillary, how do we browbeat them in line? By calling them sexist. This delegitimizes their concerns, assassinates their character, and stifles debate. That’s really all this is about. Silencing dissent and discrediting any would be critic who tries to go near her. It’s sickening. Don’t fall for it. Stay strong.

I’m not even saying no attacks against Hillary are sexist. Some are. I’ve heard the Lewinsky thing brought up again, and people using it to say stuff like “Hillary can’t satisfy her own man, how can she satisfy the country?”, which is an awful, sexist, attack against her. But let’s not act like every criticism against her is sexist, and let’s stop accusing people of being sexist out of the blue when they just legitimately don’t like her, and have good reasons not to like her. We are in a very unique election cycle, where the field is changing. What used to not be accepted is now accepted, what used to be acceptable is no longer acceptable. People are angry, and tired of the status quo. They want change. Just because the representative of the status quo is a woman does not mean everyone who is anti establishment is attacking her out of sexism.

No comments:

Post a Comment