There is a special election coming up in Utah’s 3rd Congressional District and Kathie Allen is the Democratic nominee. Over the last six months, Allen has been receiving lots of criticism from “Democrats” for not being “good enough” on certain issues.
In recent weeks, these criticisms against Allen have intensified, with many “Democrats” choosing to support her Republican opponent, John Curtis. Curtis is a man who has voiced opposition to women’s rights, has run ads in favor of a border wall and stated his support for Donald Trump’s agenda. Yet, despite these facts, many “Democrats” and “progressives” seem willing to support him anyway.
Stephen Tryon, the Democrat who ran for the same seat just last year, wasn’t criticized by Democrats in the ways Allen has been criticized. This is despite the fact that Tryon was considered to be much more conservative than Allen is. It seems that many “progressives” wish to hold Allen to a different standard.
Focusing on the faults of a woman, no matter how minor, while being willing to ignore the faults of a man, no matter how major, is called misogyny. It’s a double standard that is unfairly applied to a woman; that is what misogyny is, that is what misogyny looks like, and that is the situation we have here.
We saw this last year with Charlene Albarran’s congressional campaign, where she, too, was held to a different standard and attacked by many “progressives” for not being liberal enough while many of these same “progressives” were completely silent about conservative positions being taken by other U.S. House candidates Doug Owens, Stephen Tryon and Peter Clemens. Again because she was a woman she was held to a different standard with different expectations. That is what misogyny is and that what misogyny looks like.
Even worse, a number of “Democrats” were criticizing Charlene for things as shallow as being “a beauty queen” or “Barbie doll.” The implication of such criticisms is that because a woman is beautiful, she lacks the intelligence necessary to be involved in politics. You will never see a man criticized this way under any circumstances, ever. Again, this is what misogyny looks like.
Hillary Clinton is yet another example where, again, she was held to a different standard and vilified in all kinds of ways, many of them unfair, because she was a woman. Some “progressives” used their dislike for Clinton as a justification to vote for Donald Trump.
As with the presidential election, we have Democrats in Utah’s 3rd Distract going out of their way to ignore a man’s anti-immigrant and other troubling statements to support him over a woman they see as “flawed.” This is what misogyny is, this is what misogyny looks like.
Democrats in the 3rd District have a clear choice. If you choose to support John Curtis, understand that you are choosing to support a man who is against the rights of immigrants, against the rights of women and has promised to support Trump’s agenda. Understand that you are supporting this man over a woman who has promised to protect the rights of immigrants, of women and the LGBT community. If you choose to support John Curtis despite these facts, check yourselves, because the message you are sending by doing so is that you do not care about women’s rights, the rights of immigrants, or the rights of the LGBT community. You are saying that you are not a progressive, a liberal, a friend, or an ally. That is the message from you.
The choice is yours, so choose wisely.
