I've been a member of MYDD for well over a year. When I first got here you had never even heard of the site.

The point is that the NOW list of egregious sexism in the primary left out the most egregious example. The point is also that the ongoing narrative that Hillary Clinton had it particulary tough because she's a woman is nonsense. If anything she had it relatively easy. A list of quips by pundits doesn't even begin to compare to the Edwards haircut story, the Kerry "Is he a metrosexual" obsession, or the racism of the Rev. Wright story.

A collection of ignorant comments by pundits isn't the same as story after story after story, and stories count more than comments.

What I want to say in this comment should be understood to apply to both sexism and racism.

I do not dispute in the least that our society is filled with sexism and racism. I also don't dispute that it was on display during and after the primary campaign.

The first point I was trying to make is that too often people are accused of being sexist or racist just because they say something negative about a person. That happens far too often. Saying something about running over Hillary with a truck is somehow perceived as a sexist remark. In what possible way is that a sexist comment?

I also don't dispute that certain comments can be ignored when made about one person and be very offensive when used  against another. Threatening to turn the dogs loose on Hillary would not be something I would consider sexist. That would be a racist comment when used against Obama. Saying the same thing about Obama brings up pictures of bounty hunters pursuing escaping slaves. Making a comment about Obama's build would not be considered sexist. Saying the same about Hillary would be instantly condemned by many as a sexist remark.

Let's face it, our society is filled with sexism and racism. We thrive on it. Sure, we have Playgirl magazine to balance Playboy, but guess which one outsells the other by a wide margin. Men and women are viewed differently. Men don't wear makeup as a general rule. Most women do. Female strip clubs outnumber male strip clubs 20-1 or more.

I got kind of side-tracked there. To get back to my point, far too many people interpret any negative comment as some kind of sexist or racist remark. It doesn't matter that the remark has nothing to do with the sex or race of the person being talked about.

A lot of women get very mad when a man says something like, "calm down". They think it is a sexist remark intended to imply that women are too emotional. Well, guess what, men aren't that fond of emotional discussions. They mean exactly what they say with that remark - please calm down so we can discuss this rationally. When women react to that comment by claiming it is extremely sexist men are left wondering what in the heck they did wrong.

Now I'm going to shutup about this subject. When you find yourself in a hole the first thing to do is stop digging. I should probably forget about posting this comment, but what the heck, it's better to talk about things than to just nod your head when you don't really agree.

That's what I meant. I don't know how you measure degrees of sexism on a scale, but you can sometimes measure the seriousness of it's effects.

simply a case of sloppy accounting. Or honest accounting take your pick.

Had the item said $400 media/image consultant nobody would have blinked because all the candidates pay that and more to the people making them look pretty on the tv.

I agree with most of what you said. In fact that is pretty much the point I was trying to make. This diary doesn't exist in a vacuum--it is in response to repeated attempts to argue that sexism is worse than racism and that Hillary Clinton had it much rougher during the primary than Obama did.

But I do think it's valid to point out that some circumstances are worse than other circumstances. That's not the same as saying that one 'ism' is worse than another 'ism.'

You are entirely missing my point, but I'm tired and I'm going to bed.

What is this "role that sexism played." If you think it "played a role" does that mean you think it affected the outcome?

That is exactly the narrative I'm arguing against. That is the narrative which attempts to delegitimize Obama's victory by suggesting he wouldn't have won if there wasn't so much sexism. Doesn't that follow? If sexism "played a role" then obviously, in a race so close, it casts doubt on whether he might have not won had sexism not "played a role."

But if I point out that Obama suffered from at least as much racism then everyone says I'm comparing 'isms,' or the examples of racism are minimized or denied. And if I point out that other candidates also were subjected to sexist attacks which were at least as bad as what Clinton was subjected to then those are minimized or denied.

It seems to me the only thing not being minimized or denied is the narrative of Hillary Clintons terrible victimization during the primary, and that narrative is not only exaggerated beyond all reason, but it also represents a sneaky backdoor way to cast doubt on the legitimacy of Obama's victory.