In December, I turned 18. For me, 18 is an age that represents adulthood, independence, and new responsibilities. Now that I’m old enough, I will be able to vote in my first presidential election in 2016. As the New York primary is approaching, I’ve been trying to do my research (does watching "The Daily Show" constitute research?) so I can make an educated decision about which candidate I will vote for. As a registered Democrat, I’ve been trying to pay attention to the differences in ideology between Bernie and Hillary. I am currently split between the two candidates, but recently I’ve begun to consider a question that many people are trying to grapple with: as a woman and a feminist, do I have a responsibility to vote for Hillary?

At a recent New Hampshire rally, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright introduced Clinton and spoke about the historical importance of electing a woman as president. She said that there was “a special place in Hell for women who don’t help each other.”

Many were taken aback and outraged at this comment. While I do believe that women should strive to empower and help other women, I don’t believe that it is right to shame women for exercising their right to vote for whoever they please. There is a way for feminists to support Hillary without feeling compelled to vote for her. Anyone, from Bernie supporters to Cruz enthusiasts, can help the feminist cause by refusing to utilize sexist language in their critiques of Clinton.

In criticisms, people should focus on her views and qualifications, not her “bossiness” or “shrill” voice. I completely agree with Albright that women should help other women; I just do not think that this idea should be distorted to guilt young women into voting for Clinton solely based on her gender.

After Sanders’ success with young women voters in the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries, people have begun to question why the 74-year-old has emerged as an unlikely “chick magnet.” Gloria Steinem, a prominent feminist activist, spoke with Bill Maher about the tendency for women to get more politically involved as they age. To support her point, she said, "When you’re young, you’re thinking: ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie,’” suggesting that some young women are supporting Sanders simply to meet boys.

Frankly, I find this comment to be dismissive. To suggest that young women are completely blinded by lust for “Bernie bros” is offensive and unrealistic. Steinem fails to consider that young woman might actually have beliefs and values that align more with Sanders than with Clinton. Steinem’s assertion reduces young women who are taking an interest in politics to boy-crazy groupies.

I can say that as a young woman myself, no attractive boy could ever have an influence on to whom I will give my vote. If I felt strongly connected to Clinton’s ideas, not even a rally full of shirtless Hemsworth brothers could convince me to vote for Sanders, and to this day, no Tinder date has ever taken me to a Bernie convention.

As a feminist, I would love to see a woman become president. I can see why women who have been put down their whole lives because of their gender may feel immediacy in electing the first woman president as soon as possible. I also have the belief that I should be able to vote for whomever I want without feeling the burden of betraying my gender and all that women have worked for. I believe that the notion that women have the power to do whatever they want with their minds, bodies, and ideas lies at the core of feminism.

I don’t subscribe to the belief that only a woman will fight for women’s rights. Sanders has vowed to move forward in the fight for equality, and I don’t think there is any reason to feel guilty voting for a self-declared “strong feminist.” Many young people who believe in equal rights are beginning to put less of a stress on gender, something that I find to be progressive and positive. Whoever gets the democratic nomination, I hope that in the future, factors like gender, race, and religion will become completely trivial.