Over the last month, Americans have seen history made over and over again: Hillary Clinton became the first female presidential nominee of a major political party. We watched as a 102-year-old woman from Arizona – born before women had the right to vote – cast her state’s votes for Clinton. And we now live in a time when some young women have never voted in an election where both candidates were white men. All of these things are remarkable, and – regardless of your political leanings – cause for celebration.
So writes our favorite man-hater, Jessica Valenti. Let’s fact check her shall we?
First woman to run for President? That would be Victoria Woodhull in 1872, against Ulysses S. Grant. FALSE
Women in Arizona won the right to vote in 1912, 104 years ago. Jerry Emmett has never been alive during a time in which women in Arizona could not vote. FALSE
Some young women have never voted in an election where both candidates were white men. It’s been 12 years since both candidates were white men. TRUE
HOWEVER, you have to go back to 1960 to vote in an election in which there wasn’t at least one African-American standing for either President or Vice-President. The first Black man to stand for President was George Edwin Taylor in 1904.
Oh dear. Jess isn’t doing too well on the fact-checking front. I wonder if she knows about that thing called Google?
Here is the heart of Jessica Valenti: she complains that misogynist killjoys insist on viewing the contemporary election through historically accurate lenses, which is a way of saying that ‘our feelings are wrong’. It comes as no surprise to me that Jess cannot grasp that the killjoys aren’t addressing her feelings, but the actual facts, and here’s her telling slip: her hateful little heart exposed.
But here’s the thing: men, it’s not your moment, and the irony of lecturing over our happiness at this particular historical milestone is not lost on us.
The people insisting on facts and denying the primacy of feelings in Jess’ world are men. This woman literally cannot write a sentence without infusing it with her hatred of men, which she can only do by erasing the existence of millions of women who agree that facts are more important than feelings. Valenti’s hatred for men is palpable, and her seething hate for women who don’t share her hivemind only marginally less so. She goes on to acknowledge that her candidate is not exactly perfect but steadfastly refuses to discuss any actual facts on the account. No way.
Trust me, those who are celebrating the possibility of a female president – or the fact that the Democratic nominee is a woman – fully understand that the moment, and the candidate, are not perfect. But name me a hurdle jumped that is. Instead of talking over women who may be celebrating, try asking us why we are doing so.
Focus on her feelings, peeps!
Ask us about what it feels like to never have seen ourselves represented at the highest level of government.
For real? Has this woman never picked up a history book? Queens and Empresses and democratically elected leaders have been a feature of our culture since the earliest records we have. What planet does this woman live on? Women, who tend not to be terribly interested in governance to begin with, have never been absent from the ruling classes.
Ask what it’s like to grow up with people constantly undervaluing your opinion, or ignoring your intelligence.
Darling Jess, people undervalue your opinion and intelligence because you’re stupid and your opinions are hateful and dumb.
Ask us what kind of world we imagine when we take a minute, just a minute, to consider how political parity might change things.
Well, based on historical rulers of the past, we’re going to war. When women lead, that tends to be what happens. But it will just be a lot more dead men, so who cares?
Lots of love,