It's a social problem. It doesn't have to be political unless lines are drawn and sides are taken in the political realm. It doesn't serve to assume the author is taking a political stance on misogyny. I don't believe she is because her article talks predominantly about culture, not politics.

Your comments about Clinton are spot on. I found myself unable to vote for her predominantly for that reason (there were other reasons); it just didn't sit right. Likewise, I could not in good conscience vote for Trump (there were A LOT of other reasons to not vote for him).

Most of these battles against misogyny are going to be ground level, or in other words community, family, school, church battles. As such, understanding conditioning is necessary to be successful and find common ground. #MeToo, despite the ridiculous narrative now being flapped about by aggrieved men, was not meant to destroy innocent men. It was as much or more about educating women out of the social conditioning that leads to becoming a victim as it was call-out out abusive behavior in men.

Men are not destroyed to have to leave the public eye for a while. Louis CK or any of the others are not prevented from earning an income. They're not even forced to stop doing what they're doing. No comedian or entertainer is owed an audience or a following.

Educating women to stop feeding into our own oppression is not about men or ruining men. It's choosing better for ourselves. And our daughters. And our granddaughters.