FEMINISTS, if they were true to their stated goal of obtaining recognition and compensation for women based on merit, should be deeply offended by anyone — man or woman — who says he will vote for Hillary Clinton simply because she is a woman. This idea should outrage feminists.

For being a woman in itself is not something with which a woman can be credited. She had nothing to do with the simple fact that she is a woman. Her character is something she creates, not her sex. There are all kinds of women. If they were true to their stated goal, feminists would be hyper-vigilant and discriminating when it comes to electing any woman. “No, we don’t want just a woman,” they would say. “We want the best.”

But they don’t say that. I realize that many, probably most, feminists believe Hillary is the best, but they typically don’t object to those who want Hillary to be president purely because she is a woman. And therefore, their alleged goal is cheapened by a tendency to assign virtue to the mere physical fact of being a woman, which perhaps explains why Hillary’s character, formed under this halo, is so poor.

Diana Johnstone, the liberal author of Queen of Chaos: The Misadventures of Hillary Clinton, responded to the notion of voting for Hillary purely because she is a woman. She was speaking to a liberal audience:

“[V]oting for Hillary because she is a woman” makes no sense to me at all. Yes, women should get together for causes that affect women in general: equal pay for equal work, equal recognition of abilities, reproductive rights, maternity leave and child care, that sort of thing. But Hillary Clinton is an individual, she is not women in general. Women together might fight for women’s right to be elected President, but that right exists. It cannot be reduced to one particular woman’s right to be President.

The President of the United States is not a purely symbolic position. It involves crucial decision-making powers. Hillary Clinton has demonstrated dangerously poor judgment in fateful questions of war and peace. That should disqualify her.

I don’t agree with Johnstone’s point that women should [just] get together to argue for causes for women — shouldn’t their empathy extend to all? — but her overall point is on the money.

The act of voting for a woman just because she is a woman should be the ultimate discrediting of feminism.

Please follow and like us: