I don't think this is true at all. I think Kamala was hampered by a few things, partly, yes, that she was a woman, but much more that she's a pretty terrible communicator and that she couldn't separate herself from a deeply unpopular status quo given that she was part of the administration that people blamed for the status quo.

Data show that around 7% of American voters would never vote for an African American president, no matter how qualified. We all know how that worked out. For women, it's around 8%. For gay men, if memory serves, it's around 21%.

I am, of course, well aware, that the playing field isn't level. But again, here, we're talking about demographics. And while there are obviously times when this is important to look at, it seems some people on the progressive Left have completely forgotten that we also need to be able to zoom in to think and empathise at the level of the individual.

Similarly, there are obviously many factors that affect enrolment to MIT, say, I'm not arguing that men's problems or any groups problems are all external. I'm saying that the members of one group have a harder time having their issues listened to and taken seriously than any other group. And you're literally proving my point.

This conversation wouldn't be happening if I'd written an article about the challenges women or black people face, for example, even though we can obviously both point to very rich and successful women and black people. If I wrote about black people only being admitted to MIT at 5%, your analysis wouldn't (only) be, they should be studying more. In fact, I strongly suspect that even if you thought that, you wouldn't say it.