What this election teaches about women

So, not a big fan of this election.



I think it is saying a lot about our society, and not much of it is good. Most elections turn people into crazies, but this one…woof. While it is bringing out the worst in men and women alike, I think it is creating a pretty horrible commentary on women. I want to state some disclaimers right off the bat, lest I seem unfair.

  1.  I don’t like any of the candidates.
  2.  I don’t think women are completely innocent bystanders to the viciousness of the political process. I didn’t think it was cool when Fiorina said she had a husband she actually likes going home to, an obvious jab at Clinton.
  3.  Men also receive harsh and unfair treatment and are victims of a lot of double standards. The whole process is a nightmare for everyone involved.

There are plenty of things I could write about on those issues, but this isn’t that post. These are some of the things that I’m concerned the current election is teaching us about women:

A woman wouldn’t become president because of her face. Because people don’t vote ugly. Ugh. I’m not one to call people ugly because, you know, I’m not in 8th grade anymore, but let’s take a look at who has been voted in.


Now there are a few former Presidents in there who may have been handsome devils back in their day (meow to those powdery wigs), but these guys aren’t exactly movie stars. Ok, Reagan was an actual movie star. Obviously people should be elected based on their actual skills and merit, not on their looks. I can’t imagine that Ulysses S. Grant was on the campaign trail explaining his success as a  General and throwing in, “And duh, Horatio Seymour is fugly!” They said a LOT of other really mean things (this is an interesting article about their meanness ), but the idea that someone shouldn’t be President because of looks is worth a thousand eye-rolls.

So why is it ok to say that about female candidates? Oh yeah, it’s not. But apparently it is. Confusing.

All those woman thoughts must be due to blood coming out of our wherever’s. One of the most irritating reasons I hear way too many times that a woman shouldn’t be President is because once a month she’d stop talking to the country. Or some other clever quip. It’s generally said with a laugh, which doesn’t make it any better. The scary thing is that people really do think that is a valid argument. What the heck? First of all, I think our country needs an in-depth lesson on the reproductive system. Second, of course men are never hormonal. Or rash. Or impulsive. Or just plain jerks. So these sentiments aren’t new, but how is it even possible that a presidential candidate is saying this stuff and still getting support? When a woman asks a hard question, do we think she has PMS and is overreacting or do we think that she’s done her research and understands the issues? Sadly the comments section of every news article seems to demonstrate people believe the former.

Why discuss policy when we can attack candidate wives? I’m no Trump supporter, but I think that meme about his wife was pretty disgusting. As well as the equally classless retaliation about Cruz’s wife. It doesn’t matter who started it, the bigger issue is that it happened. Not even because of a sense of chivalry or something, but because this is the freaking presidential race. With all of the issues concerning America that need to be addressed, we’re deciding it based on who has a hotter or less skanky wife? I respect the role of the First Lady and would like a good example in there, but when it comes down to it I really don’t think much about her. I tend to care more about the policies of the Commander-in-Chief, so how’s about we talk about those instead? Unless, of course, it’s a cheap cop-out to avoid talking about the issues.


Most importantly, what this election teaches me with every news article is that we need more women in politics. At every level.

Back in January, there was a huge blizzard in D.C. and only women showed up to run Congress. I loved that. Senator Murkowski said, “As we convene this morning, you look around the chamber, the presiding officer is female. All of our parliamentarians are female. Our floor managers are female. All of our pages are female. This was not orchestrated in any way shape or form, we came in and looked around and noticed that … something is genuinely different, and something is genuinely fabulous,” she said. “Perhaps it speaks to the hardiness of women. That put on your boots and put your hat on and get out and slog through the mess that’s out there (via NY Daily News).” I love what she said about the hardiness of women. Isn’t that what we need more in politics?

There are a lot of gender issues in our country that both women and men face. I firmly believe men have a lot of issues that need to be dealt with. How can we adequately address them when we’re missing strong representation for one of the genders? It’s not about one being better or in control of the other–we really do need each other to improve things for everyone. I know this particular election has made me educate myself more on issues and recognize there is much more I need to learn. I hope it inspires millions more to do the same.

And note vote for a goon.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.