How sexism drives support for Donald Trump

[Dill]

(11-04-2016, 10:55 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Neither of the candidates are probably really appealing if women's equality is one of your primary concerns.

Trump for obvious reasons, and Clinton because she worked closely with, is friendly with, and took lots of "donations" from Middle East leaders who would have a woman beheaded for showing their face in public. Places where honor killings, throwing acid in women's faces, and genital mutilation are a thing.

One of the candidates has taken the international stage to stump for women's rights; the other is known for grabbing them by the pxxxx and calling them pigs.   So I do find one somewhat more appealing in regards to women's rights.

I lived in the Middle-East for many years and don't recall any regime that beheaded a woman for showing her face in
public. Throwing acid in women's faces is done by private individuals in many countries we trade with, including Afghanistan, Brazil and India. I don't have a problem with the Clinton Foundation taking money from "sexist" countries like Saudi Arabia and channeling it into life-lengthening medical treatments for millions of people. You going to walk into the children's HIV ward in a Nigerian hospital and empty the beds because the Clinton's are giving Saudi Arabia back it's donation?

And honor-killing is a cultural practice which is outlawed by every government in the Middle-East--except perhaps the Islamic State. I don't know what their stance is. But it makes little sense to, say, refuse a donation from the King of Jordan because some Bedoo killed his sister in violation of Jordanian law. Accepting the donation does not send the message you are ok with honor killing.

Same deal with genital mutilation. This is largely an African problem, not Middle-Eastern (with the exception of Egypt). I don't think the Clinton foundation has had many donations from Somalia, one of the poorest countries in the world with a government that only controls have of Mogadishu.

I know Hannity and Rush have tried to make this a big Republican talking point--Hillary takes money from the Saudis who don't allow women to drive so how can she be a feminist? And maybe it works for some Republicans, who selectively refuse dialogue with "evil"--until it arrives in the form of their own authoritarian, sexist candidate. But I don't see a contradiction here, especially when there are many Clinton-related or supported organizations in the Middle East who work for women's rights there. Refusing donations for medical care would do little to advance women's rights and taking such money does not support sexism.