There are women who are angry with me for having read both candidates' platforms, and listened to all their speeches, and having read much analysis on both, and in the end choosing to support Obama.

Why? Is it because I thought for myself?, because that's the number one thing my feminism demands; a passion to educate myself and then Act.

No one is calling Clinton supporters names when they point out that they are 1) older, 2) white, and 3) women. It's true of many of her most stalwart supporters. This is not name-calling, it's identity politics, which is fair game when people have made the case that women ought to vote for women.

Some of the vicious supporters want to tell me that its not because I thought for myself, but because I thought "wrong." It seems to be another excuse for being angry - it doesn't say anything more than I don't happen to share their opinion.

Out of nowhere, older women seem to be angry with me for not being a more militant feminist - I hear that I am not taking up the fight for equality. I absolutely am. I fight to be paid properly, I fight sexism and harassment at every turn, and I consider carefully the pro-choice voting record of candidates I choose to support.

What is it that I'm not doing?

To those who supported Clinton because they feel she's the best leader, I respect you. I happen to feel differently, but I agree with you in principle. To those who supported Clinton simply because she's a woman and they're a feminist, I don't understand why you'd cede your responsibility to think out your position. I'd be willing to respect you, if you would a) calmly tell my why your candidate was better, and b) accept that voting for McCain is far worse than simply writing in Clinton, which I would respect.

Being a feminist means I've got to use my brain, and once I have, I get to demand respect for my vote, no matter who I voted for. It doesn't mean that I have to support a woman or suffer being barraged with insults and threats by women who think I should support a woman... that's not my feminism.

Cheers. Another independent-minded feminist.

I'm with you. This whole line of argument, in addition to a brand of hideous victimhood, are simply anathema to anything I thought feminism represented.

I have got to believe there are more of us who feel dismayed that what was a worthy struggle for equality has degraded into an ugly us v. them zero sum game. Calling that feminism? I don't recognize it.

Many Clinton supporters would calmy and gladly tell you why they think she was the better candidate. The most striking thing I found in the twenty-something debates was Clinton's command of the intricacies and realities of the office she sought and of the issues America is facing. The only other Democrat who impressed me to that level was Joe Biden (who, sadly, didn't make it very far). I could go on and on about her pragmatic, substantive approach; she's a hard worker, a fighter, a brilliant political mind, etc.

As many of you have alluded to, feminism has allowed for a viable female presidential candidate to not only exist, but to be judged by her character and actions - and not by her gender. The unfortunate thing is, I would agree with many analysts and observers who say that there has been a fair deal of misogyny from some prominent people in the media (conscious or not).

The same holds true for African Americans and racial equality. The difference I see is in the overwhelming number of people, black and white, who seemed to vote for Obama in large part because he is black. I was initially rather disturbed at the percentages of the black vote that he was receiving - normally around 90%. I think it does show that race played a large part in many African Americans' votes. As worrisome as I initially found this to be, I came to at least sympathize with this phenomenon.

I live in Portland, where we just elected an openly gay man to be our mayor. As a gay man myself, I struggled to maintain a neutral perspective when considering my vote. Luckily, in this case, as with Obama, the 'minority' candidate was a very convincing candidate and I honestly could not see that his main rival was a better candidate. So, the African American vote for Obama no longer worries me.

But, it is definitely interesting to see that the same phenomenon did not occur for Senator Clinton. (Imagine if she had received 90% of the female vote!) Personally, I find it a little sad as I found her to be the stronger candidate.

"About one in eight white South Dakota voters said race was important in choosing their candidate. Of that group, nearly two-thirds voted for Clinton - slightly more than those saying race was not significant. Those figures were fairly typical for white voters in other states."

<link>

19 percent of Clinton voters in Pennsylvania said that race played an important role in how they voted.

In Appalachian Kentucky, it was what, 1 in 5?

Blacks are 13.1% of the US population. When 90% of them go for Obama, that's about an 11 point swing? Contrarily, in a couple of states, 20 points voted against him because he's black.

On another note, I just had the opportunity to spend a week in Portland; you're one lucky guy. It's got to be the most pleasant city I've ever visited in the U.S. Stumptown coffee isn't any good though.