Would it have happened were she a man?

Many who like to think of themselves as feminists welcomed Hillary Clinton's announced candidacy. It was certainly about time a woman ran for President and reassuring that this one seemed destined to be a winner. 

But then she and her team got scared and it became almost impossible not to cool towards a woman who appeared to be showing more and more of her aggressive, sniping feathers. Equally a sense of unease began to sprout as to the behavior of her increasingly tempestuous husband.

But how ashamed of this should those who deserted her feel? It might be worth considering how her aggressive and statesman-like campaign have been received were she a man. 

Throughout history the assertive woman becomes the shrew, particularly characterised by her reaction, often regarded as hostile and ungracious,  when under-threat. True, many of her comments were ill-judged. But so too were those of Obama and virtually ever other Presidential candidate one can think of to mention. 

Margaret Thatcher often met with criticism in her early days for what she put down to the female qualities in her voice which made her sound shrill and grating when perhaps a man would have just come across as convicted in his message. 

But there are other factors too which forced Hilary out of the 'liberal progressive choice' box and into the role of 'dragon'. Her rival stole her platform of challenging history and implicated her in his attacks on the establishment. Consequently she was forced onto the defensive and into what came across as a negatively charged campaign. 

It almost feels as if it was too late for Hilary. Whether America is ready for a female president is no longer the issue - it is far more interesting, and a challenging to see whether it is ready for a black one. But then, so far evidence suggests the answer to the first question is still 'no'.