This past week I overheard a classmate of mine telling her friend that she was planning on voting for Hillary Clinton because, “she’s like a woman and it’s time for old men to stop like running our government, ya know?”

Not that this was the first time I’ve heard that ‘reasoning’ before, but it still amazes me when I hear people say that. Would it be cool to have a female president? Of course, it would be awesome to have a woman as president… if she was the best suited person to run our country, of course.

Now, although I support equal rights and opportunities for all people, I don’t consider myself a super active, nor a very expressive feminist. I believe all women, and all people for that matter, deserve equal treatment. However, I don’t understand how voting for someone based on his/her gender is considered to be equal treatment.

Actually, if I really think about it, I think voting for Clinton because she’s a woman is not only retroactive in the feminist movement, but also degrading to her as a person. Personally, I interpret the feminist movement to be about women not letting gender define them, but rather establishing themselves based on their abilities, knowledge, skill sets, and so forth. For someone to vote for a woman to run one of the most powerful countries in the world simply so we can say that we have had a female president is choosing the first definition of a woman, based on gender, over the second definition, based on ability.

In my opinion that "bragging right" that Clinton’s presidency would bring feminists isn’t worth it. Now, I say that because regardless of her gender, religion, sexual preference, skin color, or even party affiliation, she simply isn’t the candidate I plan to vote for. This decision has been based on my comparison of our views, and stances on certain issues, as well as my disagreement regarding her plans as president. However, there are a lot of people who feel differently, which is great and why democracy exists.

A lot of Clinton’s fans can even make a good argument for her based on just her credentials alone. I mean she has firsthand experience with White House ordeals from serving as the First Lady, she was a United States Senator, and she recently served as Secretary of State. She has more experience than virtually any her opponents ever could. Although this still doesn’t convince me personally that she’s the best candidate, it just serves as more reason as to why I am so amazed when people base their support for her simply because she’s a woman. As a person, she has accomplished more than most people in the political realm ever will, but now people are going to say she should be president just because she’s a woman? Not only does that not seem logical, but it also seems unbelievably demeaning to her accomplishments.

As primaries continue, we’ll all see who people actually support and probably even hear why from a few, passionate voters. Hopefully, their reasoning will differ from that of my classmate’s, but the results will speak for themselves. Happy Election Season!