Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are battling to be No.1 in the race to be the Democratic nominee for the White House. Credit:AP Given the tantalising opportunity to send the first woman to the oval office, who would have thought young women, especially those under 30, would lean overwhelmingly to Sanders, a 74-year-old senator from Vermont and self-declared "democratic socialist"? The question so infuriated Gloria Steinem and Madeline Albright they lashed out at these young women, thus exacerbating the problem. The combined message of the 60s feminist icon and the first female secretary of state: young women were being led by their hormones into the Sanders camp and deserved to burn in hell. But the resulting outrage spawned some outrageous responses, typified by the "open-letter" from Allison Glennon in the left-wing publication Salon, which begins, "Dear Older Women insisting all women vote for Hillary." "We understand the allure of a female president after everything you've been through in your lifetime," she continues, in one of many lines that make me want to force feed her The Feminine Mystique. "But … based on the principles you've taught us, we know having a female presidency is less important than gaining true gender equality … We're not willing to give up the values you've instilled in us for a trophy, even at your request." It's a theme that pops up frequently— even here, post-Gillard, many young women embrace Sanders as the "real feminist" candidate.

Yet on policy there's little to differentiate Clinton from Sanders — admittedly, that's partly thanks to the latter focusing the debate on economic inequality. Clinton emphasises affordable childcare, Sanders affordable college. The main distinction is tone; he speaks radical change, she steady progress. (A consistent theme for Clinton, whose 1969 Student Commencement Speech at Wellesley College eschewed revolution and extolled "the art of making possible".) Sanders says he'll pursue a Scandinavian-style universal health system and take on Wall Street. Now I would love to be proven wrong in calling such aspirations fairytales. But getting the compromised ObamaCare package through Congress cost the current president all his political capital and turned his hair grey. That he succeeded at all owed something to Hillary's failed attempt at healthcare reform in 1993 during her time as First Lady. Could a female Sanders even exist? Could a little-known, revolution-spouting bubbe (Yiddish for grandmother) with unkempt hair and "authentic" dress sense take off like this? Do women get to be mavericks? In a sitcom, maybe. Set against the Bernie Sanders show, Clinton appears rehearsed, uninspiring and self-obsessed. Here is one of many Hillary paradoxes: a distinguished record brings her to this juncture but, because she has a record, it can be used against her. Critics offset her championing of children's health and education, female reproductive rights and gay rights, with her support for welfare cuts in the 1990s and the Iraq war a decade later. And like a heat-seeking missile, scandal seems to find the Clintons; dubious money trails, private email server, sex (his) and consequent cover-ups (his and hers.) New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd has accused Hillary of "killing institutional feminism" in the 1990s. Dowd argues the same older feminists now advocating for Hillary had defended Bill's bad behaviour and stayed mute as his allies "mauled his dalliances as trailer trash and stalkers".

This is indeed where things get murky and dark. I feel for Monica Lewinsky; she was so painfully young, and the establishment sisterhood left her twisting in the wind. But wars often claim collateral damage — it was wartime then, just as now. The enemy has rifles cocked, acts in the name of God, and is hostile to the feminist agenda. I speak not of Islamic State but of the Republicans, radicalised by their own grassroots revolution. Hillary is a veteran of epic battles with what she once called "a vast right-wing conspiracy". So why not choose an experienced warrior to lead the troops? Younger women could be excused for thinking the feminist battleground has fallen quiet. Thanks to their second-wave forebears, women now outnumber men in college. From the "safe spaces" on campus it can be hard to grasp the reality of structural discrimination. Once women enter the workforce the shock tends to hit hard. The boys clubs. The society shaped around the assumption that men work full time and wives stay home. The realisation that having children fuels men's careers but stalls, or cripples, theirs. And suddenly everything from the gender pay gap to the gross under-representation of women in boardrooms, institutions and legislatures springs into focus. In a decade's time, the same young women now reluctant to support Hillary might find they're fed up with hearing yet another woman reason why yet another woman shouldn't be promoted, and they'll start chasing those "trophies" with a vengeance. Girls, it's fine to back Sanders and his socialist revolution. Who knows, maybe it's the right call. But if choosing Bernie over Hillary counts as "feminist", then feminism doesn't count for much any more.

Julie Szego is an Age columnist, author and freelance journalist.