Share
9th November 2016
10:56am GMT
Feminists worldwide are scrambling for answers. How can a man who (allegedly) deliberately walked in on a fifteen year old beauty contestant when she was naked, who has admitted to groping women without their consent, who has made sexual remarks about his own daughter, who can be heard in a video stating that he’ll be "dating one of them in ten years" in reference to the group of ten-year-old girls he was looking at, who hates LGBTQ people, black people, immigrants, Muslims, and women have just won over women?
Hillary Clinton’s nomination and presidential bid appeared to be a huge step forward for women’s rights, but for which women? Feminist support for Clinton often centred around her policies on women's rights and, frequently, her stance on abortion rights. However, even loyal Clinton supporters (myself included) have to admit that her reputation as a defender of human rights is shaky at best. Her foreign policy, particularly with regards to the Middle East, is hard to package as women-friendly when Clinton-supported groups are killing women and their children in Gaza, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Of course, there are critiques of every potential President and Hillary was certainly open to a long list of them but I find it horrifying that we will watch a man, who has so appalled women worldwide with his behaviour, be sworn in as President next January. Should women have voted for Hillary just because she is a woman? No. Women should have voted for Hillary because she is not Donald Trump.
Explore more on these topics:
