Old-school feminists apparently are so frustrated by Hillary’s lackluster campaign that they’re resorting to sexist stereotyping of young female voters. Take feminist icon Gloria Steinem’s recent remark to Bill Maher: “When you’re young, you’re thinking, ‘Where are the boys?’ The boys are with Bernie.” Maher shot back that Steinem would slap him for suggesting such a thing, and he’s right. Meanwhile, former secretary of state Madeline Albright suggested there is a “special place in hell” for women who don’t support Hillary. It seems only feminists can insult women voters as airheads or heretics, interested solely in the social aspect of political campaigns, and face no media backlash.

The real problem for the Hillary Clinton candidacy is that Democratic voters — women and men — just aren’t that excited about her. Many are uncomfortable with massive ethical lapses and the constant hint of scandal. Clinton and her feminist fellow travelers clearly assumed she could bank on the media and public swooning about the “historic nature” of her push to become the first female president, as they did for Barack Obama in 2008. But, for many reasons, voters simply don’t see electing a woman president as a social-justice priority.

Supporters of true equality should appreciate that women don’t appear compelled to vote for a female candidate out of gender solidarity, but rather are evaluating candidates on their character and ideas. Yet it’s no surprise that the feminist movement — which long ago abandoned equality for a doctrine of gender privilege — wouldn’t see it that way. For Steinem, Albright, and their ilk, women who don’t obediently embrace all aspects of the feminist agenda and worldview are traitors. It’s this rigid tribal mentality, not boy chasing, that is driving more and more young women away from their tired movement.