Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the "mansplain" accusation coming from? Isn't the author of the linked article a woman?

Exactly.

It's because people are saying Bernie is a good feminist and Hillary supporters are saying that can't possibly be... they don't want Bernie to mainsplain feminism to them. Or something like that.

Ftr, I'm the pp you quoted and I'm a Hillary supporter.

Okay, let the record show...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As soon as people start defaulting to "mansplain" just because there's a man in the conversation, we've gone in the wrong direction.

Exactly. OP is a 47 year old woman with multiple degrees, some of which are in women's studies so those comments are just silly.

Congratulations, I too am an educated adult woman who doesn't need someone to "inform" me who the "real" feminist is, vying to be the Democratic presidential nominee. It's cheap and condescending. If you want to have a real conversation, try starting one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Yeah, sorry, his lumping Planned Parenthood into the "Establishment" was the final straw against him for me. They are and have been the stalwart against anti-choice attacks. Economic issues are obviously enormously important, but if I don't have the right to dictate what happens with my body, what do I have? And he just sort of waved away its importance.

That's not what he said. He was explaining PP's support of the establishment candidate and defending his own record.

His full quote is here. http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/bernie-sanders-takes-risky-shot-the-establishment No, it definitely looks like he's being dismissive out of hurt pride.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the "mansplain" accusation coming from? Isn't the author of the linked article a woman?

Exactly.

It's because people are saying Bernie is a good feminist and Hillary supporters are saying that can't possibly be... they don't want Bernie to mainsplain feminism to them. Or something like that.

No. OP said Bernie is the "real" feminist. Eye rolls to the high heavens.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is the "mansplain" accusation coming from? Isn't the author of the linked article a woman?

Exactly.

It's because people are saying Bernie is a good feminist and Hillary supporters are saying that can't possibly be... they don't want Bernie to mainsplain feminism to them. Or something like that.

Ftr, I'm the pp you quoted and I'm a Hillary supporter.

Anonymous wrote:Where is the "mansplain" accusation coming from? Isn't the author of the linked article a woman?

Exactly.

It's because people are saying Bernie is a good feminist and Hillary supporters are saying that can't possibly be... they don't want Bernie to mainsplain feminism to them. Or something like that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. We need Berniebros to mansplain feminism to us. Hilarious.

Well, we're just not smart enough to understand why we need a strong white man to protect us. It's not our fault. We were born this way.

This is my favorite Bernie Bro meme. Because nothing says "we need a man in the White House" like rippling muscles and a WWII propaganda poster.

Why do you care?! Someone thought it would look cool. Make or commission your own of Hillary looking awesome with rippling muscles or with a super intelligent look on her face or whatever sort of idea you want to get across.

This happens to be my favorite Bernie meme:



You can find whatever you are looking for.

Anonymous wrote:As soon as people start defaulting to "mansplain" just because there's a man in the conversation, we've gone in the wrong direction.

Exactly. OP is a 47 year old woman with multiple degrees, some of which are in women's studies so those comments are just silly.

Where is the "mansplain" accusation coming from? Isn't the author of the linked article a woman?

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, sorry, his lumping Planned Parenthood into the "Establishment" was the final straw against him for me. They are and have been the stalwart against anti-choice attacks. Economic issues are obviously enormously important, but if I don't have the right to dictate what happens with my body, what do I have? And he just sort of waved away its importance.

He didn't wave away the importance of PP. You are completely ignoring the context of his comment. PP is going to support the Dem Establishment candidate. That's undeniable. He didn't imply PP isn't significant; he implied endorsements aren't really significant because any group that lobbies Congress is going to voice support for the party establishment pick.

If anything, his comment was less about PP specifically and more about the ridiculous game of endorsements. Endorsements aren't usually based on an objective view of which candidate is better. They are made out of political self-interest. No one is going to bet on the underdog -- even if the underdog is the better pick -- because they don't want to be alienated when the establishment pick, as expected, gets the nomination.

There's a reason Warren hasn't endorsed anyone. I think it's because Clinton isn't exactly her preference, but she knows she'd be alienating herself if she came out in support of Sanders. That's the game. I actually respect Warren for just kind of keeping quiet during the primary and not overtly supporting either candidate. She's trying to balance survival as a politician with being true to the principles she originally ran on.

It's why I give little credence to endorsements. I suspect a lot of them are products of backroom negotiations and quid pro quo promises. But no one will ever come out and admit that.

And that's exactly the nonsense I think a lot of people are frustrated with. It's one thing when these kinds of handshakes are made between politicians. It's worse when they are made between lobbyists and politicians.

I think this entire election cycle is evidence that some people are kind of tired of the feeling that a group of political elite run the country in a manner that isn't at all transparent and that often is determined by individual career self interest and less about the needs of the constituents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. We need Berniebros to mansplain feminism to us. Hilarious.

Well, we're just not smart enough to understand why we need a strong white man to protect us. It's not our fault. We were born this way.

This is my favorite Bernie Bro meme. Because nothing says "we need a man in the White House" like rippling muscles and a WWII propaganda poster.

It's very lazy to toss around "Bernie Bro" instead of talking about real things.

[quo
te=Anonymous]Yeah, sorry, his lumping Planned Parenthood into the "Establishment" was the final straw against him for me. They are and have been the stalwart against anti-choice attacks. Economic issues are obviously enormously important, but if I don't have the right to dictate what happens with my body, what do I have? And he just sort of waved away its importance.