Before Short Attention Span Nation moves on to the next new thing, let us not give short shrift to this: For the first time in American history, a woman will be a major political party's presidential nominee.

Sure, it has seemed inevitable since at least 2008, but it's no less remarkable that Hillary Clinton has reached the top of the Democratic ticket. Like her or not, she won it fair and square, no matter what Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and his supporters might think. She won more states, more pledged delegates, more superdelegates and most of all, more popular votes.

Some 13.5 million people voted for her in primaries and caucuses, 3 million more than voted for Sanders. That's 57 percent, which is landslide territory. Sanders is still being petulant. He should have the grace to bow out and throw his support to her.

Women have run great nations before; most were either born to the job or won parliamentary elections. Democrats chose Clinton directly. She didn't make it easy for herself. The culture didn't make it easy for her.

Rebecca Traister, a journalist who admits to being a former "Clinton hater," makes an important point in her New York magazine profile of Clinton:

"Though those on both the right and the left moan about 'woman cards,' it would be impossible, and dishonest, to not recognize gender as a central, defining, complicated, and often invisible force in this election. It is one of the factors that shaped Hillary Clinton, and it is one of the factors that shapes how we respond to her. Whatever your feelings about Clinton herself, this election raises important questions about how we define leadership in this country, how we feel about women who try to claim it, flawed though they may be."

Slavish attention is devoted to her clothes and hair. She is criticized for being aloof. Her voice is called "shrill."

The nation has now twice elected an African-American president, but the levels of hostility that Barack Obama endured demonstrated clearly that many Americans can't quite get past his race. Many of them won't be able to get past Clinton's gender, either.

This is an era of profound dislocation for American males. Six years ago, in a seminal article in The Atlantic, Hanna Rosin noted: "The postindustrial economy is indifferent to men's size and strength. The attributes that are most valuable today — social intelligence, open communication, the ability to sit still and focus — are, at a minimum, not predominantly male. In fact, the opposite may be true."

Women are getting more college and professional degrees than men. Increasingly they are better prepared and more qualified than male candidates for some jobs. We can think of one man and one job in particular as November's election approaches.

REPRINTED FROM THE ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

Photo credit: