Fracas said:





It links to this post that essentially argues that Clinton is an anti-minority feminist candidate even if a better choice than Trump (read it for yourself, I'm probably not tl:dr-ing it enough).



Frankly, I didn't even know this was an issue among feminists. Do people here share that view? Or is it some isolated cases? As I took it, Clinton's nomination is a pretty big milestone for women. Not to say I'm opposed to discussion, which is why I made this thread. I saw this on Twitter earlier:Frankly, I didn't even know this was an issue among feminists. Do people here share that view? Or is it some isolated cases? As I took it, Clinton's nomination is a pretty big milestone for women. Not to say I'm opposed to discussion, which is why I made this thread. Click to expand...

A rich, cut throat woman who has committed countless crimes against marginalized people should not be the stuff your dreams are made of. Click to expand...

Squire said: Also, this is maybe a little rich coming from an organization run by someone accused of being a TERF. Click to expand...

I was all ready to hear the argument, but it just repeats the statement over and over. Why does she think that Clinton is the enemy of marginalized women? She overwhelming has the support of african-american voters (those voters were hugely important in her winning the nomination), so this probably isn't a view that's very largely held among minority voters.So maybe I've been over-exposed to this type of language, but doesn't that seem a bit like a gendered insult (calling her cut throat instead of powerful, which a man with similar credentials to her would likely be called).What is a TERF?