Last week I discussed Hillary Clinton emulating a male appearance in her choice of clothing style. I believe she bring femininity into the political realm rather than consent to dressing in the style already established.

A writer for In These Times feels that Clinton is not only dressing like a man, but acting like one in order to forge ahead in this male dominated field. She is disappointed that Clinton has acted like every other “poll-driven opportunistic politician.” This writer wants a woman to run for president and bring her femininity with her. She wants someone to bring humanity to government and the country. Not a candidate who refuses to talk about her gender. This writer brings the point even farther to say John Edwards and Barack Obama are bringing the humanity to politics which is traditionally seen as coming from females.

I think Hillary Clinton needs to discuss her gender and what it means to her and society that she is a woman candidate. She claims she doesn’t discuss this because she is not running as a woman, but as a candidate and equal to every one else. This statement seems a back door out of the issue. The public wants to hear Clinton’s views on female presidency and whether or not she thinks this is relevant, she must discuss what the voters are asking. If she can’t do this now, then what will happen with other, more pressing issues later on down the road? Clinton should not downplay the fact that she could be the first female president. This is a huge step in women achieving equality and should be celebrated, not ignored. She is making history and refusing to acknowledge it. Women need to hear this acknowledgement.