Hillary's Blatant Sexism: 'I just think women in general are better listeners, are more collegial, more open to new ideas'

OttawaPhil · 2016-01-07T18:13:53+00:00

Imagine the OUTRAGE if a man said "I would make a better president because I'm a MAN" and listed male qualities!

Leinadro · 2016-01-07T18:04:35+00:00

So Im sure Marcotte, Valenti, and the folks at Jezebel and Salon will be all over this to call her out on such a sexist statement right?

Our_media_lies · 2016-01-07T20:45:28+00:00

Hilary is an awful bigot. I'm fine with having a woman president but why does it have to be her. She is such a liar too.

Nissa-Nissa · 2016-01-07T19:07:31+00:00

So I came to this sub, wielding a vagina, and preparing for outrage. But seriously, for fuck's sake Hilary. That's so overtly sexist I'm offended.

Fair enough, mens.

__throwaway16384 · 2016-01-07T19:18:53+00:00

[permanently deleted]

645456sadsd4554 · 2016-01-07T18:52:10+00:00

This is the new norm.

Men are less than women unless you're an attractive top man.

It's that fucking basic. It's THAT fucking sad. Fucking monkeys.

mattreyu · 2016-01-07T17:50:43+00:00

Sorry, I couldn't hear you over all the Y-chromosomes in my ears

pnw_diver · 2016-01-07T19:16:50+00:00

What vile, bigoted, sexist garbage. So Hillary Clinton hates men. Got it.

ThePigmanAgain · 2016-01-07T21:06:12+00:00

Better listeners? Maybe. Open to new ideas? Only when they are insane ideas such as putting a plutocratic, warmongering neo-con in the White House simply because she's woman.

2016-01-07T18:49:12+00:00

There is another cause of this strange servile disease in American democracy. It is to be found in American feminism, and feminist America is an entirely different thing from feminine America. I should say that the overwhelming majority of American girls laugh at their female politicians at least as much as the majority of American men despise their male politicians. But though the aggressive feminists are a minority, they are in this atmosphere which I have tried to analyse; the atmosphere in which there is a sort of sanctity about the minority. And it is this superstition of seriousness that constitutes the most solid obstacle and exception to the general and almost conventional pressure of public opinion. When a fad is frankly felt to be anti-national, as was Abolitionism before the Civil War, or Pro-Germanism in the Great War, or the suggestion of racial admixture in the South at all times, then the fad meets far less mercy than anywhere else in the world; it is snowed under and swept away. But when it does not thus directly challenge patriotism or popular ideas, a curious halo of hopeful solemnity surrounds it, merely because it is a fad, but above all if it is a feminine fad. The earnest lady-reformer who really utters a warning against the social evil of beer or buttons is seen to be walking clothed in light, like a prophetess. Perhaps it is something of the holy aureole which the East sees shining around an idiot.

But I think there is another explanation, feminine rather than feminist, and proceeding from normal women and not from abnormal idiots. It is something that involves an old controversy, but one upon which I have not, like so many politicians, changed my opinion. It concerns the particular fashion in which women tend to regard, or rather to disregard, the formal and legal rights of the citizen. In so far as this is a bias, it is a bias in the directly opposite direction from that now lightly alleged. There is a sort of underbred history going about, according to which women in the past have always been in the position of slaves. It is much more to the point to note that women have always been in the position of despots. They have been despotic because they ruled in an area where they had too much common sense to attempt to be constitutional. You cannot grant a constitution to a nursery; nor can babies assemble like barons and extort a Great Charter. Tommy cannot plead a Habeas Corpus against going to bed; and an infant cannot be tried by twelve other infants before he is put in the corner. And as there can be no laws or liberties in a nursery, the extension of feminism means that there shall be no more laws or liberties in a state than there are in a nursery. The woman does not really regard men as citizens but as children. She may, if she is a humanitarian, love all mankind; but she does not respect it. Still less does she respect its votes. Now a man must be very blind nowadays not to see that there is a danger of a sort of amateur science or pseudo-science being made the excuse for every trick of tyranny and interference. Anybody who is not an anarchist agrees with having a policeman at the corner of the street; but the danger at present is that of finding the policeman half-way down the chimney or even under the bed. In other words, it is a danger of turning the policeman into a sort of benevolent burglar. Against this protests are already being made, and will increasingly be made, if men retain any instinct of independence or dignity at all. But to complain of the woman interfering in the home will always sound like complaining of the oyster intruding into the oyster-shell. To object that she has too much power over education will seem like objecting to a hen having too much to do with eggs. She has already been given an almost irresponsible power over a limited region in these things; and if that power is made infinite it will be even more irresponsible. If she adds to her own power in the family all these alien fads external to the family, her power will not only be irresponsible but insane. She will be something which may well be called a nightmare of the nursery; a mad mother. But the point is that she will be mad about other nurseries as well as her own, or possibly instead of her own. The results will be interesting; but at least it is certain that under this softening influence government of the people, by the people, for the people, will most assuredly perish from the earth.

G.K. Chesterton, What I Saw in America

BruceCampbell123 · 2016-01-07T20:01:55+00:00

I just think men in general are better workers, more hard working, and more open to long hours.

2016-01-07T23:12:07+00:00

more open to new ideas

Yeah feminism is a living refutation to that, it's the ideology most intolerant of dissent, they are not open to debate under any circumstances. What a load of shit. Jesus.

choaniki · 2016-01-07T23:07:41+00:00

Margaret Thatcher has proven her very wrong.

aussietoads · 2016-01-07T23:09:49+00:00

Shrillary Klingon, bringing the borg to you, one cliche' at a time.

Lethn · 2016-01-07T18:34:46+00:00

This is more funny than an outrage, feminists are basically living examples of how fucking wrong that is.

killwomens · 2016-01-07T21:40:41+00:00

I am really getting tired of these cartoon generalizations about men. I can appreciate how offended women are when men do it. We should be granted the same degree of respect.

el_nikon · 2016-01-07T22:23:32+00:00

Flip It

David Duke says he would govern differently than an African-American president

David Duke says he would govern differently than a Black president because his own life experiences have prepared him well.

"I think that my life experiences, what I care about, what I've been through just make me perhaps more aware of and responsive to a lot of the leadership issues that people are struggling with whether it's finances or looking to get their incomes up because everything is increasing in cost," he told Time magazine writer Jay Newton-Small for his new book "Broad Influence: How European-Americans are Changing the Way America Works."

In excerpts released Thursday, the independent presidential candidate suggested he believes Whites govern differently than Blacks.

"I just think there are some areas where our own life experiences really prepare us to be more receptive," Duke said. "I do think there is something in the governing or organizing approach. I just think Whites in general are better leaders, are more intelligent, more open to new ideas and how to make things work."

The former state congressman said he admires Russian president Vladimir Putin, who Duke called "a really effective strong leader" and "right now the major leader in Europe, not just in Russia."

Asked whether he has seen racism change over the years, Duke said it might be less pronounced but it's still "prevalent in our political scene."

"There still is a double standard, there's no doubt about that," he said. "I see it all the time where Whites are just expected to combine traits and qualities in a way that Blacks are not. And it does make running for office for a White a bigger challenge. It's hard for anybody, but I do think that Whites bear that extra burden."

Whisper · 2016-01-08T05:49:31+00:00

All sexes are equal. But some are more equal than others.

2016-01-07T17:51:41+00:00

That is not my reality.

iMalinowski · 2016-01-07T19:43:02+00:00

That's simply a matter of upbringing.

2016-01-07T23:49:34+00:00

The interesting part of this is that you know she doesn't believe a word she's saying, she's just desperate to get as many female voters as possible because she wants to win. What's worse is that she is under the impression that women like these sexist remarks and will vote for her based on them (because you know if a man said the same thing with the gender reversed he'd be chased out of the race by an angry mob of CNN and MSNBC reporters).

mikesteane · 2016-01-08T00:12:51+00:00

"There still is a double standard, there's no doubt about that,"

No double standards would mean that she could not claim she should be elected because she is a woman.

kragshot · 2016-01-08T02:06:42+00:00

I'm pretty sure that she is spot on with the "listening" part...because for the life of me, I just can't hear a word of what comes out of her mouth....

2016-01-08T03:18:08+00:00

"TOOLMAĸER 2 hours ago What I don't get is she wants your vote because she's a female, but she wants to be treated no different than a male candidate, then keeps harping about a war on women.

Which way is it Hillary ?"

awesomedan24 · 2016-01-08T03:44:54+00:00

more open to new ideas

Coming from the most status-quo politican in the 2016 race

locks_are_paranoid · 2016-01-08T05:19:55+00:00

Vote for Bernie Sanders.

giveupvote · 2016-01-07T17:59:14+00:00

Typical feminist. I don't even have to read the article to know its a bunch of liberal arts bullshit. I don't need to read tumblr, or take a class in womens "studies" to know how to program.

bananastanding · 2016-01-07T20:12:11+00:00

I just think women in general are better listeners, are more collegial, more open to new ideas and how to make things work in a way that looks for win-win outcomes.

I see it all the time where women are just expected to combine traits and qualities in a way that men are not.

Part of the problem much?

Edit: formatting

MRMRising · 2016-01-07T22:38:49+00:00

Hillary Clinton says she would govern differently than a male president because her own life experiences have prepared her well.

Because why? The privilege's that have been afforded because of her gender? Lets not forget, Hillary is a draft dodger who did not have to go to Vietnam because vagina.

Duthos · 2016-01-08T00:44:54+00:00

Certainly better at getting men off for rape.

Akesgeroth · 2016-01-08T00:55:04+00:00

The wrong thing to do is to confront her about her sexism directly. The best thing to do is to ask her in what aspects she thinks men are better than women.

brartod · 2016-01-08T01:10:42+00:00

I just think this old, rusty cunt in general is imbecilic, inefficient, useless, ignorant, criminally inept, more open to waste taxpayers' money.

TheDude41 · 2016-01-08T06:19:38+00:00

Chauvinist female pig.

mwobuddy · 2016-01-08T08:04:30+00:00

"I just think men in general are better doers, more mechanically and mathematically inclined, and open to invention.".

Oh, did I go too far, hilly?

Not_my_foreskin · 2016-01-08T08:37:43+00:00

Man, what bullshit. Fucking feminist Hillary. It'd be one thing if, like Bernie Sanders told her to stop shouting or something.

GenderNeutralLanguag · 2016-01-08T11:15:26+00:00

LOL. It would be rather simple for any Clinton supporters to show this isn't sexism. If Clinton can be cited as saying "I think men in general are better (Insert something good like Engineer)." Then this isn't sexism. Asserting that there exist gender differences isn't sexism. If she can be cited as asserting ways men are better than women, she is asserting gender differences exist not the sexism of female superiority.

Now, does anyone think these quotes actually exist?

OmegaParticle · 2016-01-07T21:23:08+00:00

[permanently deleted]

OmegaParticle · 2016-01-07T20:30:12+00:00

Don't worry too much about it. She won't last a year.

Title	Hillary's Blatant Sexism: 'I just think women in general are better listeners, are more collegial, more open to new ideas'
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	197
Comments	72
Date	January 7, 2016 5:36 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3zwi5z/hillarys_blatant_sexism_i_just_think_women_in/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/hillarys-blatant-sexism-i-just-think-women-in.963678 https://theredarchive.com/post/963678