Yes, precisely the reason Clinton's described most often as "dishonest" on Twitter is her violation of gender norms.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/02/09/heres-what-people-say-when-they-attack-hillary-clinton-on-twitter/ …
-
-
Replying to @Billare
Would a male politician, say surnamed Edwards, friendly w/Wall Street at one moment, breathing fire the next, endure the same treatment?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Billare
Would a male politician, say surnamed Nixon, have to endure scrutiny over what he deemed privileged private correspondence b/w officials?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Billare
In the depth of feeling about Hillary, one could only find 2-3% of the critiques referencing her appearance in some way. Still—problematic!
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@Billare it's the same thing over and over, can never be falsified, can never be surprising or new2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@sarahdoingthing The problem is the theory they rely upon has little form: What is the word dist. associated w/acceptance of norm-breaking?1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Billare
@sarahdoingthing If it's about norm-breaking, why're potent women stereotypes like "caring", "compassionate", "likable" relatively far down?1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Billare
@sarahdoingthing W/many permutations of it, or any list not sanitized beyond complete inoffensiveness, little doubt we'd get the same piece.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.