It’s not a question. It’s a hypothetical that attempts attempts to influence you into thinking you’re sexist. It infers that if Hillary was a man her various transgressions would be ignored, or at least tolerated. [/quote]
You mean “implies,” but you’re wrong. I’m not implying that if she were a man her transgressions would be tolerated.
I’m asking if (and maybe implying that) the main reason that so many people hate her so much is that there’s a dissonance between what we want from a woman and what we get from Hillary.
Almost all politicians have committed transgressions that must be tolerated if we’re to vote for them. Hillary is no different in that respect. I’m saying that people hate her, not because of her transgressions, but because of something else, and that that something else is related to her being a woman. Is that different from saying that they would forgive those transgressions if she were a man? Yes. In a subtle but important way. If you ask those people why they hate Hillary, they won’t even mention Benghazi or emails. They’ll talk vaguely about her character or her personality. Maybe they already forgive those transgressions, but they still won’t vote for her because they hate her.
Where Hillary is different is the amount of seething hatred she garners from those who might not hate another politician who’d done the same things and held the same positions. And that’s what I’m trying to understand.
