Misogynistic language....

[deurbano]

364. I don't understand the need for all the insults, no matter which candidate one supports.

But they aren't all just "perceived" insults... and some are sexist.

Before Sanders entered the race, many complained Clinton was just too "old." Not just old in her ideas (which is a perfectly fine) but OLD. To me, it was a double standard based on looks that I believe is imposed much more harshly on women. (Elizabeth Warren has less wrinkled skin, so some of those promoting Warren's candidacy didn't seem to realize they are less than two years apart in age when they proclaimed Clinton too old.)

I've also heard (here) that Clinton would be nothing without her husband. Anyone vaguely familiar with her life's history would know that is BS, and it is insulting and sexist, too.

In 2008 here, Clinton was called Shrillery (etc. etc., etc.). So, I think there is some reason to be concerned that things can get out of hand, ESPECIALLY if a well regarded and long-time poster thinks it's okay. Many (most?) posters didn't know what the spoonerism meant, but the poster who was banned did know. (As he made that clear in an earlier post, back when the term was used against Sarah Palin.) So, it's like this slightly underground way to call something Clinton did cunt-ish. Not everyone would "get" it. (Almost makes it worse.)

I would like him reinstated after a "time out" (or whatever), but I think he and some others first need to acknowledge it's not overreacting to find the use of cunt (or cutesy work-arounds) unacceptable on this Democratic forum.

Just argue the candidates' records and positions without all the stupid, offensive insults. And yes, some Clinton supporters also say stupid, offensive crap.

For the record, I support Sanders... and have already voted for him once, when I was living in VT in 1996 and backed him for governor. (Hope he is more successful this time!)