but I wouldn't oppose a woman
If within my Green Party, a woman wants to run for the office, I wouldn't oppose her. If I were contemplating running as a Green for an office, but another party was likely to nominate a woman, I wouldn't oppose her. So, for example, I wouldn't be running for Senate this year as a Green in Maryland, because the Democrats nominated a woman.
Even if the Republicans or Libertarians nominated a woman, I'd stand down. I'd support a woman running as a Green, but I wouldn't run myself.
I feel so strongly about boycotting men for public office, that I would stand down if a woman were running.
-----
A huge difference between Hillary Clinton, and Kamala Harris, is that Hillary made a huge fucking deal about running AS A WOMAN.
Kamala doesn't. And I think this gives her an edge that Hillary tossed aside. You don't break the glass ceiling by running AS A WOMAN. You do it by beating the pants off the man. Which, objectively, I believe Kamala is doing. She's a better candidate than Trump.
Being a better candidate, but also a woman, means the contest is a jump ball, a coin flip, because a significant proportion of males refuse to vote for a woman. Even some POC men will refuse.
We're seeing the largest gender gap in history in support for Harris vs. Trump. Neither campaign will bring it up, but this election is a referendum on feminism (and reproductive rights). Can the US allow women to be in charge? Just as the Obama campaign was a referendum on racism and the centuries-old refusal of white people to allow a black man as their social equal.
Feminism.
Can men overcome millennia of patriarchy and allow a woman as their social equal? Or, will they vote for the two white dudes?
Even if the Republicans or Libertarians nominated a woman, I'd stand down. I'd support a woman running as a Green, but I wouldn't run myself.
I feel so strongly about boycotting men for public office, that I would stand down if a woman were running.
-----
A huge difference between Hillary Clinton, and Kamala Harris, is that Hillary made a huge fucking deal about running AS A WOMAN.
Kamala doesn't. And I think this gives her an edge that Hillary tossed aside. You don't break the glass ceiling by running AS A WOMAN. You do it by beating the pants off the man. Which, objectively, I believe Kamala is doing. She's a better candidate than Trump.
Being a better candidate, but also a woman, means the contest is a jump ball, a coin flip, because a significant proportion of males refuse to vote for a woman. Even some POC men will refuse.
We're seeing the largest gender gap in history in support for Harris vs. Trump. Neither campaign will bring it up, but this election is a referendum on feminism (and reproductive rights). Can the US allow women to be in charge? Just as the Obama campaign was a referendum on racism and the centuries-old refusal of white people to allow a black man as their social equal.
Feminism.
Can men overcome millennia of patriarchy and allow a woman as their social equal? Or, will they vote for the two white dudes?