Today, The Nation posted this piece by Suzanna Danuta Walters about how isolated she feels among her caste of progressive friends. “For maintaining my support for Hillary, I’m a dupe and a traitor,” she writes. “I support her less for her particular political positions…than for the iconic value-added of electing the first woman president of the United States.”

So in a word, she says she is voting for Hillary Clinton because Hillary Clinton is a woman.

She says she’s doing this not because she imagines Hillary Clinton will usher in some Feminist revolution, but because she might get people talking about it in the abstract, the way, you know, I talk about buying a goat farm in the abstract.

“It may help animate conversation, instill fierce female pride, and inspire young girls the world over,” she writes, “…having a woman in that very male White House may just trigger some needed discussion and stir social movements.”

Yeah, ok. Maybe. Maybe plunking a vagina down on that chair in the Oval Office “may just” trigger some discussion. I guess?

Because the way I see it, Suzanna’s premise for voting for Hillary Clinton is like donating your life savings to the Susan Komen Foundation because you want people to talk more about breast cancer. You know that Susan Komen is just going to use most of your money to pay its executive administration exorbitant salaries and bonuses, but you’re taking comfort in the thought that at least a tiny fraction of it “may just” spark an internal memo about actually fixing boobies. I mean it’s a really roundabout way of having a discussion about boobies, but here we are.

To me, Hillary Clinton is like the Susan Komen Foundation running for President. Like maybe if you squint there’s some boobie discourse going on— and who doesn’t love talking about boobies? — but the boobie talk ultimately serves to pinkwash the internal apparatus of inequality.

And it’s because of places like the Susan Komen Foundation that I’m pretty much done with anyone who tries to advance the argument that “sparking more discussion” is a politically worthwhile enterprise. I can’t point to Susan Komen any harder to illustrate the disutility of discussion for discussion’s sake in helping poor women.

Our entire media culture orbits around the proliferation of ostensibly useless discussion derivatives. This is pretty much the only commodity Silicon Valley is trading in. They are banking on it never running out.

A lack of discourse isn’t the problem. It’s our questions.

I get people’s interest in seeing a woman as President. It’d be awesome. But I’d also be interested in seeing a Jewish President. An Asian President. A gay President. A working-class President. A Socialist President.

And when I begin to reflect on the subject of inequality and representation, it brings me to the most fundamental question of this election (maybe every election): if America’s biggest problem right now is inequality, how do we dismantle a political machine that keeps putting fuckheads financed by antidemocratic interests into political office?

Because from where I sit, Hillary Clinton is financed to the hilt by pretty much every antidemocratic interest I can think of.

Yes, Hillary Clinton played the game. She dedicated her entire life to playing the game and has played it exceedingly well. I won’t diminish her political accomplishments. Who could?

But because I know she’s played the game, I know she’s got stories to tell about how fucked up the game is for women every step of the way and she’ll never tell us about them.

You know how I know? Because she’s not using her privilege of constant visibility to talk about the institutionalized inequality of a system that has now put her at its head.

While she may talk about equality as some future promise, her campaign strategy ensures there is no fucking way she’s able to alienate herself from her tight community of primarily male hedgefund backers.

She has a vagina, sure, but simply having a vagina won’t stop anyone from selling out the nation.

I’m sorry you feel alienated by all your friends, Suzanna. It sucks. I feel for you. But I also sense from this piece that you’re so removed from the actual struggles facing the vast majority of working women in this country that you don’t get how ridiculous it sounds from our perspective to moralize voting for someone whose political ascendance has been brought to us by the exact same financial regime that has been fucking us over to pay out million-dollar bonuses.

Because there is no solidarity in Hillary Clinton’s campaign save the solidarity of the rich.

Speaking as one white Socialist Feminist to another, I’ll go ahead and say that White Feminism is garbage and it’s because even places as supposedly progressive as The Nation see fit to pay people like Suzanna to write shitpieces like this that this needs to keep being said.

If this is the kind of discourse Hillary Clinton is inspiring white feminists to write, no wonder the movement is stalled.

If all we can aspire to as Feminists in 2015 is inciting more discussion in the shitstream that is our collective Facebook consciousness, we are plainly fucked.