• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is referring to Hillary Clinton by her first name a subconscious form of sexism? (1 Viewer)

Is referring to Hillary Clinton by her first name a subconscious form of sexism?

  • Secretary Clinton is referred to by just her first name no more or less than other candidates.

    Votes: 12 42.9%
  • It's true and an expression of our sexist attitudes.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • It's true. A positive thing as it expresses a greater level of endearment by dropping formalities.

    Votes: 1 3.6%
  • Other. Explain

    Votes: 15 53.6%

  • Total voters
    28

Smeagol

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
4,147
Reaction score
1,694
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Senator Rubio...Governor Pataki...Hillary. Anybody else notice its really common for the first woman to have a legitimate shot in begin the next President of the United States of America by her first name, a distinction the male candidates generally don't share? I've never heard Donald Trump referred to as just "Donald" or Sen. Ted Cruz as just "Ted." Furthermore, it is an unintended expression of a discriminatory attitude toward women and/or disrespectful? BTW: I've been just a guilty as anyone in referring t Secretary Clinton as "Hillary" and it on;t recently dawned on me.

Back 2008 I heard a liberal radio talk show host notice presidential debate moderator Juan Williams was being referred to as simply "Juan" by one of the candidates while everybody else was Mr. this or Sen. that. He suggested it was a dog-whistle tactic appealing to some racist voters in a race where every vote adds up by insinuating the black guy didn't deserve the same level of respect as the white guys on stage in a way that non-racists would not notice.
 
Last edited:
Senator Rubio...Governor Pataki...Hillary. Anybody else notice its really common for the first woman to have a legitimate shot in begin the next President of the United States of America by her first name, a distinction the male candidates generally don't share? I've never heard Donald Trump referred to as just "Donald" or Sen. Ted Cruz as just "Ted." Furthermore, it is an unintended expression of a discriminatory attitude toward women and/or disrespectful? BTW: I've been just a guilty as anyone in referring t Secretary Clinton as "Hillary" and it on;t recently dawned on me.

Back 2008 I heard a liberal radio talk show host notice presidential debate moderator Juan Williams was being referred to as simply "Juan" by one of the candidates while everybody else was Mr. this or Sen. that. He suggested it was a dog-whistle tactic appealing to some racist voters in a race where every vote adds up by insinuating the black guy didn't deserve the same level of respect as the white guys on stage in a way that non-racists would not notice.

No. It is merely a way to differentiate her from her husband BILL Clinton.

Merely saying "Clinton" might cause some confusion.

We would have to keep saying "Hillary Clinton," and it is easier to shorten the identifier for discussion; just like we shorten Donald Trump to merely Trump or called the Bushes Sr. and Jr. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Senator Rubio...Governor Pataki...Hillary. Anybody else notice its really common for the first woman to have a legitimate shot in begin the next President of the United States of America by her first name, a distinction the male candidates generally don't share? I've never heard Donald Trump referred to as just "Donald" or Sen. Ted Cruz as just "Ted." Furthermore, it is an unintended expression of a discriminatory attitude toward women and/or disrespectful? BTW: I've been just a guilty as anyone in referring t Secretary Clinton as "Hillary" and it on;t recently dawned on me.

Back 2008 I heard a liberal radio talk show host notice presidential debate moderator Juan Williams was being referred to as simply "Juan" by one of the candidates while everybody else was Mr. this or Sen. that. He suggested it was a dog-whistle tactic appealing to some racist voters in a race where every vote adds up by insinuating the black guy didn't deserve the same level of respect as the white guys on stage in a way that non-racists would not notice.

I've seen it pointed out before. But we also called Jeb Bush "Jeb," and for the same reason we call Hillary Clinton "Hillary," which is what we called her before she was running for president too. There's another politician of the same surname who is still common enough in the news, or near enough to memory, that to call them by their last name only could potentially be confusing.

We do, after all, call them Pelosi, Palin, Bachmann, and Warren. "Hillary" is a somewhat exceptional case, like "Jeb" is.

That said, there has been a tremendous amount of sexism lobbed at her over the years, which has done nothing but redouble during her campaign. I think it is likely she gets even more sexism aimed at her than the average female politician, because she has so much history and so many older and more sexist people remember her. But in this particular instance, a cigar might simply be a cigar -- at least to me, and how I've used her name.

To others... well, I can't speak for them.

ETA: radcen has a point, actually. "Bernie" is common, and "The Donald" is used by some. This election has a lot of first name usage, actually.
 
Last edited:
Senator Rubio...Governor Pataki...Hillary. Anybody else notice its really common for the first woman to have a legitimate shot in begin the next President of the United States of America by her first name, a distinction the male candidates generally don't share? I've never heard Donald Trump referred to as just "Donald" or Sen. Ted Cruz as just "Ted." Furthermore, it is an unintended expression of a discriminatory attitude toward women and/or disrespectful? BTW: I've been just a guilty as anyone in referring t Secretary Clinton as "Hillary" and it on;t recently dawned on me.

Back 2008 I heard a liberal radio talk show host notice presidential debate moderator Juan Williams was being referred to as simply "Juan" by one of the candidates while everybody else was Mr. this or Sen. that. He suggested it was a dog-whistle tactic appealing to some racist voters in a race where every vote adds up by insinuating the black guy didn't deserve the same level of respect as the white guys on stage in a way that non-racists would not notice.
I've thought about this some. I don't think it's sexism, but rather a twinge of a general lack of respect.

I refer to her as Hillary often.

The notion would be more pronounced if Sanders wasn't also routinely referred to by his first name only, too. Even Trump is still sometimes referred to as "The Donald", which goes back a long time.
 
Senator Rubio...Governor Pataki...Hillary. Anybody else notice its really common for the first woman to have a legitimate shot in begin the next President of the United States of America by her first name, a distinction the male candidates generally don't share? I've never heard Donald Trump referred to as just "Donald" or Sen. Ted Cruz as just "Ted." Furthermore, it is an unintended expression of a discriminatory attitude toward women and/or disrespectful? BTW: I've been just a guilty as anyone in referring t Secretary Clinton as "Hillary" and it on;t recently dawned on me.

Back 2008 I heard a liberal radio talk show host notice presidential debate moderator Juan Williams was being referred to as simply "Juan" by one of the candidates while everybody else was Mr. this or Sen. that. He suggested it was a dog-whistle tactic appealing to some racist voters in a race where every vote adds up by insinuating the black guy didn't deserve the same level of respect as the white guys on stage in a way that non-racists would not notice.

It is stupid to call it sexist, when it was bill clinton as president, it made sense to say clinton. Not we have a former presiden and a former first lady/ presidential candidate, it makes sense to use first names to differentiate.

much like people say bush 41 and bush 43, since there were 2 george bush presidents.Bush's however never got first name since both had the same first name.
 
For me, it's simply the way to differentiate her from her husband when referring to her - nothing more. Plus, have you seen her advertising logos? She's using her first name and first initial in all of her advertising:

From 2008 -
150413120730-hillary-clinton-2008-logo-780x439.png


First 2016 logo -
14firstdraft-hillary-logo-tmagArticle-v3.png


Current logo -
2000px-Hillary_for_America_2016_logo.svg.png


It would appear that she is doing the same, as I am. Differentiating herself from her husband. Nothing sexist in that.
 
You have to differentiate her crimes from her husbands. You can't just use the catch- all "Clinton crimes". It is too big and has to be sorted between the appropriate criminals, since they are married.
 
I don't give a ****.
 
Senator Rubio...Governor Pataki...Hillary. Anybody else notice its really common for the first woman to have a legitimate shot in begin the next President of the United States of America by her first name, a distinction the male candidates generally don't share? I've never heard Donald Trump referred to as just "Donald" or Sen. Ted Cruz as just "Ted." Furthermore, it is an unintended expression of a discriminatory attitude toward women and/or disrespectful? BTW: I've been just a guilty as anyone in referring t Secretary Clinton as "Hillary" and it on;t recently dawned on me.

Back 2008 I heard a liberal radio talk show host notice presidential debate moderator Juan Williams was being referred to as simply "Juan" by one of the candidates while everybody else was Mr. this or Sen. that. He suggested it was a dog-whistle tactic appealing to some racist voters in a race where every vote adds up by insinuating the black guy didn't deserve the same level of respect as the white guys on stage in a way that non-racists would not notice.

Bernie............
 
No, it's ambiguous because her husband shares her last name.

That's why we have to distinguish President Bush with President Bush 2, or 41/43, or GHW vs GW.

We need unique references in order to be coherent.
 
There is certainly sexism hurled at Hillary, but calling her Hillary isn't among them because, as others have pointed out, there are other candidates we call by their first names. I say "Bernie" not "Sanders".
 
For me, it's simply the way to differentiate her from her husband when referring to her - nothing more. Plus, have you seen her advertising logos? She's using her first name and first initial in all of her advertising:



It would appear that she is doing the same, as I am. Differentiating herself from her husband. Nothing sexist in that.

Excellent points, and pretty much puts the question to rest, IMO.
 
I never really thought about it till now.

Some will mention Bernie, but that is just another anomaly in the game. As I think about it, candidates are almost never referred to by their first name.

Hmmmm......

Still wouldn't explain Bernie though. Are we gonna dream up accusations of subconscious antisemitism for that one?
 
hillary-clinton-logo-2016.png
Is Hillary a subconscious sexist? Perhaps if she ran as Sen. Clinton or Mrs. Clinton?
 

Attachments

  • 11174876_903334636389733_2191364501962816506_n.jpg
    11174876_903334636389733_2191364501962816506_n.jpg
    6.9 KB · Views: 287
  • 150413120730-hillary-clinton-2008-logo-780x439.jpg
    150413120730-hillary-clinton-2008-logo-780x439.jpg
    21.5 KB · Views: 424
  • images.jpg
    images.jpg
    17.1 KB · Views: 193
It is stupid to call it sexist, when it was bill clinton as president, it made sense to say clinton. Not we have a former presiden and a former first lady/ presidential candidate, it makes sense to use first names to differentiate.

much like people say bush 41 and bush 43, since there were 2 george bush presidents.Bush's however never got first name since both had the same first name.

You don't remember "Dubya" "Baby" "Boy George" "Bush lite" "W" "Shrub"? There were plenty, mostly mocking or over-familiar epithets applied to the smirking chimp...Many referring if not using his first name.
When she is president, there could be some confusion, but until then, the context, linked to the use of the feminine pronoun would be sufficient to differentiate between husband and wife. I'm not sure if sexism is at the root of the use of her first name, or even from her having been First Lady. It's interesting.
 
Yeah, and referring to Sen. Sanders as 'Bernie' is really subconscious antisemitism...

:roll:
 
Sure it is. But only if you can condemn republicans for sexism so she can win the election. Remember how you were a racist if you didn't vote for Barry?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Senator Rubio...Governor Pataki...Hillary. Anybody else notice its really common for the first woman to have a legitimate shot in begin the next President of the United States of America by her first name, a distinction the male candidates generally don't share? I've never heard Donald Trump referred to as just "Donald" or Sen. Ted Cruz as just "Ted." Furthermore, it is an unintended expression of a discriminatory attitude toward women and/or disrespectful? BTW: I've been just a guilty as anyone in referring t Secretary Clinton as "Hillary" and it on;t recently dawned on me.

Back 2008 I heard a liberal radio talk show host notice presidential debate moderator Juan Williams was being referred to as simply "Juan" by one of the candidates while everybody else was Mr. this or Sen. that. He suggested it was a dog-whistle tactic appealing to some racist voters in a race where every vote adds up by insinuating the black guy didn't deserve the same level of respect as the white guys on stage in a way that non-racists would not notice.
Fake outrage thread in order to try and make Hillary Clinton a victim. The people on this forum getting paid to support Hillary Clinton are out in full force it seems.
 
Fake outrage thread in order to try and make Hillary Clinton a victim. The people on this forum getting paid to support Hillary Clinton are out in full force it seems.


lol. I don't know what it is about political season. It seems people got so emotionally invested, they suspect anyone with an opinion or even thinking out loud is on some sort of mission.
 
Fake outrage thread in order to try and make Hillary Clinton a victim. The people on this forum getting paid to support Hillary Clinton are out in full force it seems.

By the way, in case anyone is interested, my only agendas are:

1. Get people to question whether or not they're thinking for themselves or simply echoing the talking points of their respective teams.
2. Pointing out double standards where people act like America is being destroyed when the other side did something but say jack-squat when their side did it first.
3. Expose racism.
4. Help all sides understand the other while trying to not take sides, admittedly sometimes with limited success.
5. Elevate political discourse whereby emotion is replaced this logic, the use of violent metaphors are avoided and all sides may freely express their perspectives without being condemned for their views.
6. Promote traditional pro-family values.
7. Promote an energy agenda whereby groups who want to see us dead are truly excluded from the economic model and not simply forced to find different trading partners thanks to our own commitment to products sold on the global market that require their only natural resource to operate.
8. Being truthful concerning history, even when WE were the bad guys.
9. Denouncing political correctness as its aim is to suppress, especially as it relates to groups who are duped into thinking their side never engages in it.
 
By the way, in case anyone is interested, my only agendas are:

1. Get people to question whether or not they're thinking for themselves or simply echoing the talking points of their respective teams.
2. Pointing out double standards where people act like America is being destroyed when the other side did something but say jack-squat when their side did it first.
3. Expose racism.
4. Help all sides understand the other while trying to not take sides, admittedly sometimes with limited success.
5. Elevate political discourse whereby emotion is replaced this logic, the use of violent metaphors are avoided and all sides may freely express their perspectives without being condemned for their views.
6. Promote traditional pro-family values.
7. Promote an energy agenda whereby groups who want to see us dead are truly excluded from the economic model and not simply forced to find different trading partners thanks to our own commitment to products sold on the global market that require their only natural resource to operate.
8. Being truthful concerning history, even when WE were the bad guys.
9. Denouncing political correctness as its aim is to suppress, especially as it relates to groups who are duped into thinking their side never engages in it.

Where was your thread full of righteous indignation when JEB! was being refered to by his first name? Oh, you were silent? Ok then. Flippant and blatant hypocrisy noted.
 
"Hillary" fits easier into a one-column headline than "Clinton."
 
Senator Rubio...Governor Pataki...Hillary. Anybody else notice its really common for the first woman to have a legitimate shot in begin the next President of the United States of America by her first name, a distinction the male candidates generally don't share?

Not at all. I think this has far more to do with that fact that in the majority of the public mind, the person who comes to mind when you hear "Clinton" would be the former President of the United States.

It's similar to how Jeb was routinely "Jeb" as opposed to "Governor Bush"
 
Where was your thread full of righteous indignation when JEB! was being refered to by his first name? Oh, you were silent? Ok then. Flippant and blatant hypocrisy noted.

I'm not on any righteous igdnation trip. Just making an observation and asking a question. If you read my original post, I admitted to doing it myself. SMH.
 
There are 2 Clintons who are famous so by just saying Clinton one would not know who they are talking about, it could be either Bill or Hillary. If you say Trump there is little doubt as to whom you are referring to.

For that reason people use Hillary because it makes sure nobody gets confused as to whom people are referring to.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom