The calls for Hillary to drop out have moved to the middle ring of the nomination circus. The acrobatic political pundits around her have twisted the argument in every way, detailing McCain’s rise with glitter, displaying Democratic frustration with ease and amazing with numbers, polls and charts galore. But past all the beguiling movement, the main theme of the show hasn’t changed. The tired, old Hillary hatred remains. The facade of rational argument is just that—a facade—for a frighteningly deep current of discrimination in the United States—and, yes, the Democratic Party.

Hillary hatred has been commented on and acknowledged, but its presence has not disappeared. When asked, “Why don’t you support Mrs. Clinton?” the answers vary. We hear about her pants suits, her politically-motivated wardrobe changes, her lack of femininity, her tears for votes, her husband’s infidelity—how can a woman who can’t control her husband control a country? We’ve heard about her frostiness, her impersonality, her lack of emotion, her negativity, her tears—the President can’t cry, get it together, woman!—and, of course, the unavoidable fact that she is a robotic, power-hungry, self-centered, heathen bitch.

This is the woman (is she even a woman?) they know: the former political wife who now sings and dances to the lyrics “My name is Hillary, first broad of liberty, of me I sing. Land where my husband lied and I stood right by his side, now it’s my time to shine, let freedom ring.”

But does she exist? These answers belong to a movement, a phenomenon that finds its own justifications. For too many—both men and women—they seem to be enough. One West Point Cadet, however, defined consciously the cause of this mysterious animosity, like no reporter or commentator has been willing to do. “Women are biologically made for nurturing, men are made for fighting. I want my commander in chief to be a fighter.” Although frightening, his words were honest. And the Hillary-hate train is powered by this hidden fuel.

Americans want to be seen as gender-neutral and quickly decry the evils of sexism, but they idolize the image of the mother, the domestic, nurturing woman who can cook, clean and hold a job. America has asked women to fill essentially hypocritical roles. We hear affirmations and guidelines daily, but it takes a second glance to see how impossible they actually are.

They tell us, “Of course you can be successful!” But don’t be too ambitious. And if you are too successful, you must be excessively power-hungry—and a lesbian, too. Be outstanding, but don’t try.

We hear, “You can do everything a man can do!” But don’t forget your femininity! It doesn’t matter how convenient pants might be; a woman pins her hair, pencils her eyes and wears heels. Don’t forget, though, if she looks too good, she is unintelligent. A pretty woman can only be a slut. Be a woman, but not too feminine, either.

They explain, “You should be strong!” But don’t become too unemotional: that’s robotic. Oh, and don’t cry or talk about your feelings: that’s weak. In short, be everything while being nothing. Hillary puts on a slew of different faces because America can’t decide which one it wants to see.

This unattainable woman’s role resonates in every insult pitched by the angry swarm and in the multitude of nuanced criticisms that unconsciously factor in these feelings. Hence Hillary’s tears in New Hampshire were a necessary and politically motivated display to show voters she had feminine emotions. But at the same time, they were a sign of weakness and if a lady can’t handle a battle in the second primary state, then she certainly isn’t suited for the presidency. Hillary can’t dress like a man, but she can’t think about her clothes, or dress appealingly. She must be motherly, but she can’t be distracted. She should be tough, but not aggressive, inspiring and substantive, smart but not hard-working.

The masculine candidates around her can be sarcastic, but similar tactics would make her “negative.” They are allowed to want to be president, but she is not–that would be ambitious, inappropriate, selfish. To win, Hillary needs to be a bitch–-a woman who unapologetically acts “like a man.” But we don’t like that in a woman, and likeability, for better or worse, is the first thing we seem to notice in a candidate (Exhibit A: George Bush, beer in hand). And so she is cursed both ways.

These are the biases that fuel current demands for Hillary to drop out of the presidential race. But why should she? If the situation were different, if she were beating Barack Obama by a slim margin, would the party and the populace be calling for his withdrawal? Did they ever call for him to step down when Hillary was the “inevitable nominee?” Democratic contests between men have gone to the floor before—in 1960 JFK was challenged by both Senator Lyndon Johnson and Governor Stevenson of Illinois at the convention—but the party still won the presidency.

What’s different now is that the underdog must do exactly what the West Point Cadet said women couldn’t do, what they shouldn’t do—she is fighting. And that is making America uncomfortable. A woman is challenging a man, a slew of men, instead of acquiescing in the face of difficult but surmountable challenges. If you would have honestly asked Obama to step out of the race when he was down by less than a percentage of the popular vote, then fine, you really care about delegate count. But think hard, because I would bet the rhetoric would be much different if the situation was reversed, and if so we need to rethink the reality of the “transcendence over sexism.”

This is not to say you should support Hillary because she is a woman, just as you shouldn’t vote for Barack Obama because he is black. But you should understand what is driving the discussion. We Democrats are supposed to be the more liberal party, yet even we cannot own up to our prejudices. Americans are not ready to accept a woman president. This is not right, but we can’t work to change it until we accept it. We cannot allow the lessons of this race to go unheard. Discrimination must be recognized before it can be confronted. Hillary likely will not win this race, but let her try. As her plastic self would say, “Let freedom ring.”