According to Madeleine Albright, since I’m not voting for Hillary Clinton, I deserve to go to hell.

According to Gloria Steinem, I’m only supporting Bernie Sanders because I desperately want boys to like me.

And according to both of them, everything I thought I knew about feminism until this point is completely wrong.

Two months ago, nobody thought the race for the democratic nomination was even a competition. But since an insane finish in Iowa and the release of Quinnipiac’s most recent national poll, things are unbelievably close. And as a response, both democratic candidates have been fighting to differentiate themselves — as much as two candidates on the same side of the aisle can — from the other.

With Senator Bernie Sanders’ large lead in his neighboring state of New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton is looking to close the gap. To join her in this fight she enlisted the help of Madeleine Albright, the first female Secretary of State, nominated to office by former President Bill Clinton.

On Sunday Albright appeared at a Clinton rally, reminding women, particularly younger women, that the fight for gender equality is not done. She urged these women to see Hillary Clinton as the best advocate for female rights.

“Just remember,” she said with a mischievous grin. “There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other”.

What has become a catchphrase for Albright was used as a warning to female voters across the country: A vote against Hillary Clinton is a vote against women everywhere.

And just the night before Madeleine Albright’s very public shaming of female Sanders supporters, feminist icon Gloria Steinem was asked about the democratic race on HBO’s “Real Time With Bill Maher”. Maher asked Steinem why she thinks younger females overwhelmingly support Sanders as opposed to Clinton.

“When you’re young you’re thinking, you know, where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie.” And then she laughed. “Oh!” Maher seemed surprised. “Now if I said that… you’d swat me” “No I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t.” Steinem protested.

And they swiftly moved to the next subject.

This is a far cry from Gloria’s 1996 endorsement of Bernie Sanders. But hey, maybe back then she was just being hypnotized by Bernie’s band of boys.

As two of the most recognizable feminist icons in American history, Madeleine Albright and Gloria Steinem have a duty to support other women. I respect and encourage that. But using their status to shame women and re-define what it truly means to be a feminist in a political setting is disgusting.

Feminism is an uprising, a push to equalize a society that currently sees women as the lesser half. Feminism doesn’t mean making decisions based solely on gender. Feminism is not shaming women for informing themselves and acting on their passions. And feminism sure as hell doesn’t mean bypassing your morals and views and experiences in this world to vote for a candidate based on their genitalia.

“So people are talking about revolution,” Madeleine Albright also said on Sunday, referring to the Sanders’ campaign rally cry. “What a revolution it would be to have a woman president.”

But voting for someone based on gender alone, as Albright suggests, couldn’t be less revolutionary. I think standing up to criminal bankers is revolutionary. And so is making decisions unclouded by corporate greed. Providing health care as a basic right is revolutionary. And having a leader who advocated for gay and minority rights even when they weren’t popular opinions is, too.

A revolution would be voting for a public servant who has dedicated their entire life to human equality. And in my opinion, the only candidate that fits that bill is Bernie Sanders.

So thanks Gloria, for your sound logic regarding today’s dating landscape. And thank you, Madeleine, for your cautionary message. But 8 years of a Bernie Sanders administration is well worth the fiery fate you talk about. To purchase YOUR one-way ticket to hell, click here.

And check out the awesome work being done by some of my favorite politically active feminists.