«

»

Sep 11 2008

Spinster aunt suffers from bridge-to-nowhere fatigue

The big push to relocate Spinster HQ to points west has begun in earnest. I’m swamped already, but apparently there is a hurricane tearing through the Gulf of Mexico with Texas’ name on it, which really puts a hitch in my gitalong. Everyone in Austin is in a panic. The local news makes sure of that.

“Evacuate! Or stock up on beer and diesel generators!” they warn, genuflecting woodenly before swirling computer graphics with terrifying red centers. “It’s a Level 42 Megacane!”

My sister Tidy called. “I’m off to buy water and batteries.”

This makes no sense to me. Why not invest in umbrellas and rafts?

OK, we might as well get it overwith. Let’s have the blametariat’s views on collaborateuse Sarah Palin, her bridge, and her possible effects on the future of feminism.

318 comments

  1. Antoinette Niebieszczanski

    In keeping with the natural-disaster theme, I’d rather hang-glide naked over an erupting volcano than see this person in the same zip code as White House.

    Camille Paglia (ptui! ack!) calls her a feminist. If this is true, even a stick-finger fire-head bleeding-heart liberal like me can see that in the future, we will call the state-owned uterus “reproductive freedom”, the pink-collar ghetto “equal pay for equal work” and theocracy “separation of Church & State”.

  2. Virago

    Sarah Palin isn’t going to do anything for feminism. She’s way too pro-life. She opposes policies that will help working women and their children. Yet, she was privileged enough to have a job where it was made easier for her to combine work and family. She cut funding for pregnant teenagers while her own pregnant teenage daughter has access to resources poor teens don’t have. She’s for abstenance only education which certainly didn’t work very well for her own family. When she was mayor of an Alaskan town, rape victims had to pay for their own rape test kits in the emergency room. Ordinarily, I would like to see a woman V.P., but not if she’s going to pander to the patriarchy. She’s a woman who has enjoyed the fruits of the feminist movement, but she wants to put policies in place that will only destroy the progress that feminism has made for women. IBTP.

  3. Scooty Puff, Jr.

    It’s a pretty common right-wing theme, actually: co-opt words from your opponent and mangle them until they mean something more in line with your point of view. For example, “freedom” becomes “obedience to a stultifyingly oppressive megacorporatheocratic regime hell-bent on killing brown people”. As in, “remember, they hate us for our freedoms, and on this, 9/11 of all days!” Don’t be surprised if Rudy Giuliani gives this exact speech at some point today.

    Now they’re taking their turn on feminism. The eventual goal, it would seem, is to corrupt feminism to mean blind obedience to a woman-hating, gay-hating, queer-hating, anything-else-you’ve-got-hating cult that determines what few privileges non-white non-dudes may be permitted through the undeserved generosity of the patriarchy, but which privileges shall never include sovereignty of the body or mind. Evidence of this is Palin’s membership in an organization whose name around which I still cannot wrap my obstreporal lobe: Feminists for Life. To put it in terms her NRA chums can understand, it would be like being a member of Gun Owners Against Ammunition.

  4. Lauren O

    I am absolutely terrified that there are people painting her as “the new face of feminism.” There have been a few writers and pundits twisting the definition to suit their conveniences for a while, but I have never seen someone just blatantly take anti-feminism and call it feminism like this.

    Being against abortion, even in cases of rape and incest, is not “the new face of feminism.”

    Promoting abstinence-only sex education is not “the new face of feminism.”

    Someone who said that Hillary Clinton needed to stop whining about unfair criticism and just be superhuman is not “the new face of feminism.”

    It is really, really scary the way even the basic tenets of our movement are being co-opted and conveniently defined in ways that help the patriarchy rather than hurt it.

  5. Shannon

    I didn’t like her to begin with but the “victims pay for their own rape kits” thing put me totally over the edge.

  6. stekatz

    Being a woman does not automatically make one a feminist. That’s basic.

    Bottom line: I’m scared shitless of this spectre. What better way to squelch feminism that to get a woman to ring the death knell. Men have been making women do their shit work since time began. Why would it be any different with this dirty task? The Republicans want to have their way, and they’ll stop at nothing, including an anti-choice woman on the ticket. What a fun way to overturn Roe vs. Wade!

    I have lost all enthusiasm for this election, and I’m even thinking of not voting. At my age, I’ve voted a lot. I have yet to see my vote count. I realized this when Arnold Schwarzenegger became leader of the state I love. It sickens me. I think we’re screwed, and I think feminists all over need to stock up on the metaphorical equivalents of batteries and water. What will we use as a generator when our power goes out?

  7. Orange

    If she finds her way to the White House (or the vice president’s residence), a broad swath of America will forevermore hold Palin up as a pinnacle of feminist achievement. It’s just a shame that while it is feminism that cleared the way for her to become a mayor, a governor, and a VP candidate, she does nothing but piss all over feminist causes.

    Too bad we haven’t heard her ream McCain for his lack of support for the Lilly Ledbetter equal pay legislation. Can you imagine if she forced him to recant on that? But I’m quite sure she won’t. She got hers–so screw anyone else who runs into trouble with sexism.

    She’s today’s Phyllis Schlafly.

    Palin gives the inattentive observer the message that McCain doesn’t hate women (regardless of his consistent adherence to anti-woman policy and his occasionally calling his wife a “cunt”). But he does, and so does Palin.

    If other blamers are talking to wavering “independents,” be sure to point out that a McCain/Palin administration WILL appoint anti-choice Supreme Court justices who WILL overturn Roe v. Wade and we WILL end up with more teen mothers (oh yay let’s marry them all off) and more dangerous illegal abortions.

  8. Izzy

    Not all females are feminists, unfortunately. Does the McCain camp really think that the same people who would like to see a woman in the white house would drop their feminist values for a super right wing-er? Maybe she could do a good job, but I don’t believe she was chosen for her mad political skills.
    I ranted about this here if anyone’s interested.

  9. mir

    Palin: batshit crazy fundie with as much relation to feminism as a Concord grape. Less.

    Her effect on feminism: co-option of the term by batshit crazy fundies. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

    Me, this stuff worries me. If I hated the press before, I loathe them now. Democrats too. They’re all complicit in our free-fall into a dark, cruel, fascist place that no one believes could ever come about. But no one ever believed a simpleton from Texas could crap on habeus corpus, either.

    I’ll hold my nose and vote Obama but I wish there were a new planet we could start anew on, I’d be first in line.

  10. Pinko Punko

    Stay safe. I have nothing good to say about Palin. I’d be happy with the LHC winking us into a black hole at this point.

  11. Stacey

    The problem with what people are posting above is that, yes, it’s true that woman does not equal feminist, but she is a participant in the group Feminists for Life (a distinctly anti-choice group), and this tidbit has been picked up and thrown around haphazardly without anyone checking to see what the group is about.

    I think her selection for VP is ominous for feminism; she has made a show of demurring to her husband on several occasions and is frequently referred to as McCain’s ‘cheerleader’ in the press. So here’s a woman who is against women’s right to abortion/cuts funding for social programs/is generally anti-woman and defers to the authority of card-carrying penis owners and is also heralded by moderates and the press as the new face of feminism. I don’t know about ya’ll but that really pisses me off.

    Furthermore, she has been quoted in interviews saying that women shouldn’t whine about unfair treatment– that if they want to earn the patriarchy’s respect, they need to work extra hard. This is obviously a lose/lose for women, thankyouverymuch.

  12. Lemur

    She scares me. And the worst part is that no matter how much I hate her, I still have to speak up when I hear “blah blah MILF”, “blah blah she should stay in the kitchen”, “blah blah spankings”. It pisses me off to see it in liberal forums because damn, her politics alone give us plenty to bitch about. Do they have to make fun of her for having the temerity to have a vagina?
    Honestly. It sucks to defend someone you’d gladly see exiled back to the tundra.
    /soapbox

  13. Pinko Punko

    Here is the Paglia quote: Palin has “made the biggest step forward in feminism since Madonna channeled the dominatrix persona of high-glam Marlene Dietrich and rammed pro-sex, pro-beauty feminism down the throats of the prissy, victim-mongering, philistine feminist establishment.”

    Time to put my head in an oven.

  14. nobodyinparticular

    Yup.

    Hate women enough and anybody can be a runaway success.

    I’d put my head in the oven, but it’s electric.

  15. Cycles

    Politics are one thing, but she’s absolutely ruining it for the brown-haired glasses-wearing women of the world. “What are you going to do?” people keep asking me, “You should at least get new glasses.”

    As usual, she’s being examined under a mega-microscope due to her being a women and identifying as a mother. We sure do like to tell moms what to do, and publicly judge them on their parenting decisions and style. I even find myself having an unreal obsession with every bit of her life. I hate her guts, yet every piece of data I can gather about her terms as mayor and governor is utterly fascinating to me. I’m sure my own internalized misogyny factors in somehow. I don’t care as much, for example, about the details of McCain’s imprisonment, although on paper that sounds like it would be much more interesting and research-worthy than Palin’s career.

  16. Medbh

    Palin is a lap cat of the patriarchy, plain and simple.

  17. Jenny

    No truer words were ever typed. “Palin is a lap cat of the patriarchy.” – Medbh

  18. lawbitch

    Twisty, the panic meter down in Houston has hit the “frantic insanity” mark. Should I duck tape the windows or make cocktails? The cocktails would quell the nausea that I feel when I have to think of Palin in the White House. Think that I’ll go with those cocktails.

  19. sonia

    that Paglia quote is the most rapist thing I’ve heard in so long.

    like beauty and sex aren’t shoved down my prissy throat every day..

    it doesn’t seem like there’s anything shocking at all about Sarah Palin. it is disturbing to watch her be a right-wing ventriloquist doll. the entire election is so irrelevant to anything real people are dealing with, and I don’t expect her to be any more in touch with real issues than the other status-quo douchebags wandering around stages in Illinois college towns preening for votes. It would be nice if she were pro-choice, because then at least we’d have reproductive solidarity.

  20. sonia

    p.s. hey Twisty? if you ever feel like it and have time between hurricanes, would you post some video of your band that once was?

  21. jc.

    Sorry about the hurricane, here in sweden it´s been depressingly grey and rainy for 3 weeks, is that any consolation?
    I think it is now time to officially change the name of the Republican party to the “Jerry Springer” party.
    They´re going to win, makes me wish at times that I`d overdosed when I was a hippy.

  22. other orange

    Palin’s as much a feminist as she is a member of Van Halen: she might like the attention, but she still can’t play guitar.

    The thing I can’t get past is how obvious the whole thing is. She is so blatantly anti-feminist. Tremendously, incredibly anti-feminist. Her stances are cruel and often nonsensical. She has sold her daughter’s privacy to the media for her own shot at- something. She belongs to a cult that hates their own private parts. She lies so effortlessly, and so often, that I wouldn’t believe her even if she was only ordering dinner.

    And all anybody can say is how fresh she seems.

    It’s painful.

  23. Amananta

    From what I hear from every near dear friend of mine, all of whom lived in New Orleans when Katrina hit, swimming through rat-infested, toxic waters past dead bodies was apparently preferable to what happens when you evacuate.
    And if Palin gets elected, I want to evacuate to Canada. “Feminists for Life” is an oxymoron, given that “life” means, in political terms, “denying the humanity of pregnant women in favor of the eyeless parasite implanted in her womb”.
    When does life begin, they demand to know. As if the pregnant woman isn’t ALREADY alive, unquestionably.
    I bring this up because Palin is a member of that disingenuous organization. In the Palin Mccain world, once they make abortion illegal (as well as all types of contraception which can cause “abortions”, since they, contrary to medical opinion, decide “life” starts at pregnancy and pregnancy starts at conception and not implantation), why men will just find themselves MORALLY OBLIGATED to step up and support those lil gals they “seduced” and knocked up, you know, do the right thing. Just like they always did before it was made legal in the first place.
    Oh wait. There were homes for unwed mothers then because they wouldn’t. Never mind.
    She reminds me, like Schlafly, of Serena Joy from a Handmaid’s tale. The irony of their position is, as happened to Serena, that if they get what they ask for they will lose what they have appointed for themselves as exception to the rules governing all women. They forget they are, or believe they can win a pass out of, being a woman. Serena Joy in the novel is a woman who advocates for women to return to the home, and to live as traditional wives. When the revolution achieves exactly this, she is relegated to her home and out of the public eye. She once made speeches but: “She has become speechless. She stays in her home, but it doesn’t seem to agree with her. How furious she must be, now that she’s been taken at her word.”

  24. Karen Davies

    I heard a UK politician say he was reminded of a “young Margaret Thatcher” when listening to her big speech where she called herself a hockey mom. His voice sounded as if he meant it as a compliment.

    May the Flying Spaghetti Monster have mercy on us all, if those words of ill omen turn out to be true.

  25. dogsmycopilot

    I am terrified of this woman. I already have had to switch pharmacies because I dare to want to control whether or not I have any more children. I can only imagine what draconian measures this traitor to her country and her gender wants to start implementing. The religion she is, is one I am familiar with. They want to replace the government with a theocracy. (Seriously.) She’s not just dangerous to we women she is dangerous to anyone who wants this country to progress instead of falling back into the dark ages. (I need a drink, now.) :(

  26. MarilynJean

    I’ve taken my fear and channeled into a pathetic attempt at humor.

    http://ishouldntlovesarahpalin.blogspot.com/

    BUT in all seriousness, besides agreeing with all the above posts (How scary IS Camile Paglia’s statement?), I certainly want to echo Lemur’s point about how it is still annoying to hear liberal/democratic/progressive men talk about her in sexist terms no matter how anti-feminist she is.

  27. Chai Latte

    The Sarah Palin thing is making me lose sleep. I am scared to death that she will become VP and reign Atwoodsian horror upon us all. Actually, said fear might’ve been responsible for last night’s heartburn as well.

    What frightens me is that the term ‘feminism’ is now being corrupted. Sarah Palin is being called one. (Yeah, and I’m June Cleaver. Fuck that noise.) Everything I stand for is slowly disappearing from underneath my feet. And it scares the everlasting fuck out of me.

  28. Cathy

    Palin: Talk about giving the P a blow job (can’t remember which commenter came up with that one; I love it)!

    If they manage to steal yet another election, I’m praying for a nearby gamma ray burst to annihilate us all and put us out of our misery. Moving to New Zealand will not help, since they’re destroying the whole world.

    I see no reason to defend this woman. She is hypocrisy personified. She and McPain are pathological liars, even rivaling King George II. I wish we could say, “Thanks, but no thanks,” to HER. Even if “progressive” men (who are complete phonies if they reject feminism) make sexist remarks about her, I wouldn’t try to clue them in by defending her. Maybe we should say, “Yeah, she should stay home in the kitchen and let a real woman, who knows what’s going on, run the show. Not clueless woman-haters like Palin and that dirty old man she’s campaigning with.”

    Perhaps we should all stock up on Plan B now, while it’s still legal (though difficult to obtain).

  29. larkspur

    lemur, I’m right there with you on the unending annoyance of having to speak up at the onslaught of bullshit from people who are allegedly at least within shouting distance of being on the same side. Shut the fuck up about her vagina, or how she must be a monster for not wanting to stay home and raise her five kids. There is so much hideously wrong with McCain-Palin administration, so much wrong with both candidates, so much wrong that has absolutely nothing to do their respective genitals and hormones.

    I so need to work on a list of contemptuous adjectives, other than my pathetic selection so far (jerk, meanie), so we can have at them without getting bogged down in stupid old shit like “cunt, bitch, prick”. One of the interesting particulars of those epithets is that the implicit threat is so different for each sex. The underlying threat for men isn’t so much that their dicks will get chopped off, though god knows it’s happened. Instead it’s that their dicks will be shown to be flaccid, limp, or miniscule. But with women, the imagery is never that her vagina is weak or unimpressive or inefficient. It’s that it is vulnerable, always, always vulnerable, even as it’s also rank and disgusting and icky.

    Sigh. Okay, there are also the epithets like ball-buster or dyke (which only is useful against straight women, really). There’s no direct line between either of those and the threat of being taught a lesson via one’s vulnerable vagina. But I know the threat is there. We all know it’s there.

    My brain is starting to hurt. I know that because (a) it hurts, and (b) it just occurred to me that no one should ever have to pay for her rape kit, and that the work-around is that we’re all armed and we kill our attackers, and drag their bodies to the police station and point and say, “Test that”. I swear we’re never going to get any credibility until it begins to sink into the minds of the predators that they might not live to tell the tale.

    Oops. OT. In conclusion, Sarah Palin is a horrible addition to a disastrous ticket. See “church and state, separation of”, for starters. There’s nothing hormonal about that potential catastrophe.

    And good luck, Texas. Stay safe. Pet Stanley and the dogs for me, Twisty.

  30. Lieutenant Reverend B. Dagger Lee

    My Andrea-DworkinBot has not stopped motoring around the apartment, making alarm noises, and issuing warnings. This is one of the things she says:

    “More than anything else, it is antifeminism that convinces right-wing women that the system of sex segregation and sex hierarchy is immovable, unbreachable, and inevitable—and therefore that the logic of their world view is more substantive and compelling than any analysis, however accurate, of its flaws. It is not the antifeminism of the Right specifically that keeps the allegiance of these women: it is the antifeminism that saturates political discourse all along the political spectrum, the antifeminism that permeates virtually all political philosophies, programs, and parties.”

    She says, “It is the pervasiveness of antifeminism, its ubiquity, that establishes for women that they have no way out of the sex-class system. The antifeminism of Left, Right, and center fixes the power of the Right over women—gives the huge majority of women over to the Right—over to social conservatism, economic conservatism, religious conservatism, over to conforming to the dictates of authority and power, over to sexual compliance, over to obedience—because as long as the sex-class system is intact, huge numbers of women will believe that the Right offers them the best deal: the highest reproductive value; the best protection against sexual aggression; the best economic security as the economic dependents of men who must provide; the most reliable protection against battery; the most respect. Left and centrist philosophies, programs and parties tend to vicious condescension with respect to women’s rights; they lie, and right-wing women are quite brilliant at discerning the hypocrisy of liberal support for women’s rights. Right-wing women do not buy the partial truths and cynical lies that constitute the positions of various liberal and so-called radical groups on women’s rights. They see antifeminism, though they call it simple hypocrisy. They are outraged by it.”

    Then she says, “That’s from my book, ‘Right-Wing Women,’ pages 233 to 234.”

    Then she says, “For crissakes, why don’t you get a Virginia-WoolfBot so I have someone intelligent to talk to? Or at least a Rhoomba to clean this filthy floor and be my pet?”

  31. daisydreamer

    Sarah Pallin is scary for her extreme views wrapped in a warm fuzzy Mommy. She can hunt the beast, kill it, skin it, cook it and make jerky out of it and still look like a beauty queen after birthing and (raising) 5 babies. She is The Ultimate Survivor.

    If only it were not Master Rove and Master Cheney whose bidding she is doing.

    I hear her kids party HARD. The Bush girls and the Pallin kids probably have too much in common for my good sense. Because I (used to) party hard. I was a juveniloe delinquent and I know what kind of fucked up parenting it takes for a kid to get to that special place. Thanks, Mommy & daddy.

  32. Lene

    What I don’t get about is why on earth John McCain picked her. Seriously, were there no other female Republicans who might actually have some, oh, what’s the word, experience? Aside from appealing to the extreme right wing of the party and having fetching ankles (which the old boys’ club might appreciate), what does she bring to the ticket? And moreover, she takes away any argument the Republicans could have used against Obama regarding his “inexperience”, so how can she possibly add anything to the ticket? There’s a cynical part of my brain that thinks it’s because they figure they can’t win against Obama, so they’ve put a scapegoat in the vice presidential spot who can be blamed when they lose the election. Or is that too paranoid?

  33. saltyC

    Nah, you can’t blame the vice-president. They didn’t blame Lieberman (remember?)

    Why does any man prefer someone with few ties, less experience, influence, clout?

    So she won’t interrupt him when he’s talking.

  34. Rebekka

    ” It would be nice if she were pro-choice, because then at least we’d have reproductive solidarity.”

    It would be great, but she’d never have been picked as McCain’s VP candidate.

    “What I don’t get about is why on earth John McCain picked her. Seriously, were there no other female Republicans who might actually have some, oh, what’s the word, experience?”

    There are a million and one excellent political reasons why McCain picked her. That lack of “experience” to which you allude is a political asset. She’s an anti-politician. She’s going to “clean up Washington” just like she “cleaned up” Alaska – she sold the Governor’s jet on EBAY for chrissakes. She’s the ultimate in populism. She’ll appeal to “hockey moms” because she is one, the freaky Republican right-wing base because she’s pro-forced pregnancy, pro-Jesus, pro-teaching bullsh*t creationism in schools, anti-decent sex ed and pro-FAMILY (in the right-wing sense of the word). She shores up that base, shores up the (non-feminist) female vote, increases the chances of getting the disillusioned-with-politics part of the right out to vote and helps to lock in the Hillary followers who are claiming they’re going to vote for McCain because Hillary was robbed (logic, not).

    In my opinion putting her in that spot was a very, very savvy move for the Republicans, and her inexperience is an asset. Plus, she’s a natural performer – her speech to the convention (while she needs a little more practice with the autocue) was brilliant (not from a policy perspective, obviously, but from the pov of a performance to her audience) and my prediction is that she’ll perform very well throughout the campaign. My money was on Obama until McCain brought Palin on board. Now I’m thinking of having a punt on McCain.

  35. josiemysourceofmostfrustration

    Like Amananta, I am having bad flashbacks from A Handmaid’s Tale. I cannot read much of what is being published by left-wing blogs and other media sources because the sexist crap that most of them are flinging at Palin is making my stomach turn. I don’t agree with any of Palin’s positions either, but attacking her on the basis or her genitals or parental status is way off base. Between the vicious beatdown that Hillary received and the woman-hating vitriol directed at Palin, I just want to put my head in the sand. Sadly enough, despite the sexist crap directed at Palin, I think McCain-Palin will still win in racist America.

    That said, I am dying to hear what Twisty makes of Palin, the media and public’s embrace of Palin and what her candidacy means for women and feminism. I keep checking this blog because I am chomping at the bit to hear Twisty’s take on all of this. I had to sit through Camille Paglia’s insane blustering. I am hoping that I’ll have the pleasure to hear about Twisty’s undoubtedly more sane and sensible point of view.

  36. Cycles

    I don’t think she’s the ingenue everybody’s making her out to be. She lacks political experience, and she’s most certainly a too-too-tool of the patriarchy, but that doesn’t preclude her from being a powerful aggressive jerk. My own prejudices lead me to assume that any anti-choice uber-Christian woman with several kids is quiet, subservient, and totally under her husband’s thumb, but of course that’s not always the case. Watch out for her. She scares the crap out of me because she contradicts those expectations.

    Rove, or one of his disciples, is behind this brilliantly stupid move. People are lapping it up. They love that she’s “like one of us.” I suspect it stems from the suspicion shared across the political spectrum that politicians are corrupt, that it’s a puppet show run by the PACs and corporations and rich families, so it doesn’t really matter who we stick in any given government slot. Or, they believe the Mr. Smith Goes To Washington outsider narrative. Otherwise, why would people be so pro-Palin, knowing that she has done jack shit to earn the spot? I really can’t think of another reason. Maybe they like her folksy gutsy character. You know. The one she plays on TV.

  37. rootlesscosmo

    @Rev. BDL: right on target as usual. Right Wing Women is a really important book, in part because it exposes–for anyone willing to pay attention–that the male “Left” is just as deeply patriarchal as the male Right. So given a choice between being oppressed by one right-wing godbag patriarch–who may, just possibly, stick around and support the kids–and being shared among a batch of irresponsible left-wing patriarchs who’ll head for the hills the moment the word “pregnancy” is mentioned, the Palin option makes a kind of grim sense.

  38. kbro

    I am terrified and heartbroken at the same time. How wonderful would it have been to finally vote for a woman on the national ticket, and instead I am horrified.

    “Palin is a lap cat of the patriarchy.” – is right (sorry – forgot to copy who said it above, bad form I know) She has entrenched herself so deeply with playing with the boys that she forgot that they don’t give a shit about her. Does she actually believe she was chosen on her merits? She was chosen as a strategy; to be used because she is, after all, only a woman, and therefore does not count, other that how can she help the Reps.

    Yeah, abstinence education really works, eh? And to put your daughter on the national stage like that is heartless. The young girl has NO CHOICE in her future (of course not, the dirty little tramp having sex before her vagina was deeded over to her husband? – she deserves what she gets), and is being used to dare Dems to say anything. Pure evil. I am pissed ~ and horrified; or did I say that already?

  39. Jeanne

    I read an article on Salon the other day about Palin (“Pissed About Palin” by Cintra Wilson) and it was full of choice invectives about her. It started my morning off right. This one was particularly spectacular:

    “I don’t want Sarah Palin being the representative leader and custodian of my rights, my Constitution and my country any more than I want polygamist compound leader Warren Jeffs baby-sitting for my preteen goddaughters.”

    Over the years, I’ve had my theories about women who willingly brand themselves as conservative and/or vote Republican, and I think I’ve figured it out: they’ve all got some fucked up strain of Stockholm syndrome.
    How the hell else can you explain it?

    On a totally unrelated note, Twisty, I loved your IKEA rant video from a few posts ago. Just when I thought you couldn’t be any more badass than you already are…

  40. Spiders

    I’m outside of the US and I’ve been watching this whole thing unfold in horror. Now, after reading all of your fears, I’m even more alarmed.
    She is like the ideal poster girl for patriarchy. I know women like her; they’ve learned the rules of patriarchy so well they start turning them on the rest of us and get rewarded for it. No wonder the guys are so excited. She helps them justify their own woman-hating attitudes.

  41. slade

    Yippee! Discussion of the neopentacostal crazy woman who is the repugnant nominee for VP. The repugnants are offering 2 insane people on their ticket…he has a temper worse than a mad hornet and an obsessive desire to hit a red button that will shake Mother Nature to her core.

    When do we get to wake up from this nightmare? I have to laugh or I will cry like a baby.

    Twisty…get a flashlight, batteries and a raft! Get ice and put it in the freezer just in case. And lots of alcohol..pot would be better.

    Will be thinking of you. Send some of that rain to Ohio so to cleanse the filthy, stupid repugnants up here. I am constantly reminding them of how stupid they are. I can bully with the best of them! I was nice in ’04…didn’t work. Nice is over.

    Take care! As always, I blame.

  42. keshmeshi

    Despite Maggie Thatcher standing for everything I disagree with, and then some, comparing her to Sarah Palin is an outrage. However horrible Thatcher’s policies were she was successful in her own right. She was no one’s token. Governor Palin’s willingness to be used as a pawn by male Republicans is shameful and bears no resemblance to Margaret Thatcher’s career.

  43. panoptical

    Sarah Palin is another Republican Weapon of Mass Distraction. They knew they needed a spectacle to distract from Obama’s celebrity status (especially since calling attention to it backfired spectacularly). Palin provides such a spectacle. Suddenly, the conversation is about her. That’s what the Republicans are great at – distraction politics and framing the conversation. They lost that in the primaries, when Barack was able to establish change as the defining issue of the campaign, but in the primaries, fortunately for the Republicans, it didn’t matter (although arguably McCain’s nailing the nomination was a ripple effect, since he was the change candidate of the Republican party). But now, Barack Obama has lost his novelty, and we’ve been hearing about change for over a year, and people want to talk about Sarah Palin. She said “Thanks but no thanks” to a “bridge to nowhere;” sold the governor’s private jet on eBay; fired her personal chef. And it doesn’t matter that none of these things are actually true, and that Sarah Palin is a liar and a hypocrite, because the damage has already been done, the disinformation is already out there, and the conversation can now be presented as petty, sexist, unchivalrous Democrats bullying Palin because she is a woman. How dare they, for example, attack the sacred institution of motherhood by calling into question Sarah Palin’s parental decisions – or any of her decisions, for that matter?

    And the country is falling for it. The Republicans are getting the media attention and the more anyone tries to debunk the Palin mythos, the more sympathy Palin gets simply because she presents herself as maternal.

    And lest we think that the McCain campaign is trying to secure the votes of people who want to see a woman in office – what they’re really trying to do is comfort the people who find women threatening. They’re presenting a contrast with HRC – a woman who many people find very threatening. By selecting her as VP, they’re not saying that women are qualified to lead; they’re saying, “we know what a woman’s place is, and that is as a man’s subordinate, his accessory, something nice to look at while us menfolk do the hard work of making all the decisions.”

    And I say again, the country is falling for it. Our media is discussing moose-hunting and beauty pageants rather than the eight years of catastrophic failures we’ve just endured.

    When McCain picked Palin he relied on the hope that the vast majority of Americans would be sufficiently sexist to a) hyperfocus on Palin’s gender to the exclusion of even Obama’s star power, b) resent any and all attacks against her positions because it is unseemly to be seen publicly bullying a woman, especially a mother, and c) experience comfort at the idea of a woman in a subordinate position that is famously without responsibilities or decision-making power. So far, the American people are not disappointing him.

  44. Hattie

    Twisty: be sure you have sturdy shoes and a walking stick.
    Best.

  45. with_wings

    Okay, I think everyone needs to take a deep breath.

    She is a distraction that will blow over; she has to.

    Did you see her interview?

    My kids know what the Bush doctrine is. She’s on the way to being over. Let her run her course. McCain has stumbled, badly.

    It’s true the race might be frightfully close. But these white Republican men (who are truly, deeply sexist to their core) are not going to let this neophyte take over. While they might think “well, her handlers can handle her” I think that deep in their hearts they also know that:

    1. She could toss out her handlers if she became president, and they know that they really can’t control her, mostly because:
    2. She is truly the religious wingnut that GWB pretends to be. Her allegiance to God is absolute, first and foremost.

    She is an inexperienced wild card and I can’t believe people at the end of the day will go along with this.

  46. Antoinette Niebieszczanski

    Sorry for commenting more than once on the same thread, but this morning I accidentally overheard part of her interview with Charles Gibson, and she pronounced nuclear “nuke-you-lur”. All I could think of was “Know-Nothing She-Bush”. And just the fact that she was saying the word gave me a bad wiggins.

  47. buttercup

    I’ll c/p what I posted on another feminist board a bit over a week ago.

    “I think she’s a sacrificial lamb. Inadequately vetted, lots of shadows in her past AND present. Get both sides talking like mad about her, just on the heels of Obama’s amazing speech at the convention. Get all the news on the GOP VPILF choice.

    Then, all the talk about her being a “beauty queen”, her attributes as a mom, her perceived strengths and weaknesses as a representative of her gender. Women all over the country are insulted that McCain thinks we’re really that stupid. Got news for you. He knows we aren’t. The neocon machine knows we aren’t.

    Do you really think they’re going to let someone with 1.5 years gubernatorial experience in a state that has less than half the population of the COUNTY I live in debate Joe Biden? Not a chance.

    There’s something else coming that will be worse-no idea if it’ll be Romney, Huckabee, but you can bet your asses it’ll be some stolid white man with an impeccable neocon score, preferably with a highly religious background. Palin will be out in less than a month. The masses will have forgotten Obama’s brilliance and only remember that the GOP put up a woman candidate who failed to qualify. Ergo, in their books, women can’t qualify. We tried, right? We tried to give you a woman, but the little dear just couldn’t handle it. Right.

    They’re so amazingly manipulative and the majority of people are so amazingly stupid that they get away with it every time.”

    I can’t bring myself to watch the interview from last night but by most accounts, she was both scary as shit (war with russia? seriously????) and squirm-inducingly naive.

  48. speedbudget

    If Palin is a feminist, Twisty is an MRA.

    I am terrified and pissed off by her, with her “my daughter made a choice that I want to take away from all of you” stand.

  49. the baboon

    I am in love with this thread; I am in love with each of the posters on this thread. It’s like 42 smart cells in my brain suddenly downloaded onto the screen in front of me. I’ve been mute with terror and outrage over Palin and it’s calming to see some of those thoughts articulated.

    I’ve got to go get my own Dworkinbot to get me through this, I think.

  50. the baboon

    Also, she makes me think of fembots and the scary feminized men in Joanna Russ’s _The Female Man_.

    (To clarify: Palin makes me think of those characters – not of transgender folk.)

  51. MissPrism

    Utterly off-topic, but I couldn’t resist pointing the blameteriat at this story. A man faced with divorce proceedings stabbed two of his children to death… and left a note telling their mother not to blame herself. Boggle. Gape.

  52. HazelStone

    I guess I don’t really get it. She’s a female W. pure and simple. This does not seem particularly surprising or interesting to me. Yet everyone I know is going batshit over this. “Sarah Palin is the end of the universe blarrrgh!”

    I mean, yeah, she’s a crappy right winger. So is McCain. So is everyone else in a position of power in the GOP. In know they’ve been spinning this as a huge vote getter, but we’ll see.

    It is a shame the Dems can’t find and run a real progressive with some smarts, convictions and charisma. If they did, the GOP wouldn’t stand a chance after the last 8 years.

    le sigh

  53. Cathy

    Blametariat:
    I don’t want to bug Twisty with this question, as she must have big problems with Ike. Could someone please explain to me why it says, “Never view this blog with Internet Explorer.” I have been using the AOL browser, which I have heard is based on IE. My recent comments have been stuck in moderation forever, and I swear I’m not some dickhead trying to argue with her – I agree with everything she writes! I’m extremely pro-feminist, though due to early brainwashing and low self-esteem, am not really a very good feminist.

    So I figure it must be a problem with the AOL browser, and am now trying to comment using Firefox. But I really like the way I have AOL set up, with the toolbar for my fave sites to visit. Also, in the past I have been able to comment from the AOL browser. I’d really appreciate anyone who could clue me in to the relatively recent problems this blog has with IE and apparently with AOL.

  54. Gansumina

    I’m frightened that I am not the only one to envision the Atwood universe in ‘Handmaid’s Tale” when thinking of Palin and what could happen if we went on for a third Republican term.

    Thanks, blamers, for putting into words what is making me crawl under the bed and hide for the next four years. Or maybe I’ll jsut make some cocktails and move to Canada. Ugh. Double ugh. Triple Ugh.

  55. MissPrism

    Cathy – I always assumed, though I tremble to presume to speak for Twisty here, that she simply dislikes IE. The moderation filter / spam detector can play up for all sorts of reasons, like if you include links or particular keywords.

  56. larkspur

    Love you too, baboon.

    I’m not all Arrgh! OMG end of the universe!!!. And I do think she’s her own person, not a cipher. I do think her selection by McCain was fueled by arrogance, cynicism, and a crass play for the religious fundies. (And an expectation that she’ll sing and dance on cue.) So the combination of her unsuitability for national office, along with what it says about McCain’s judgment – well, I think it warrants an Arrgh! and an OMGWtF!.

    I picture them getting sworn into office, and I’ll be thinking, “Oh yeah, great, fine. It’s all fun and games until someone loses an eye. (Substitute “eye” with “economy” or “Bill of Rights” or “infrastructure” or “half of Whatthefuckistan”, etc….) McCain Palin might actually be rilly rilly sorry about it afterwards, but we haven’t got that kind of time.

  57. blondie

    Thank you blametariat.

  58. missannethrope

    I’ll tellya why I’m so scared by Ms. Palin – cause she’s gonna get McCain elected and our country’s standing in the world is going to slide further downhill, culminating probably in lots of little wars everywhere (or perhaps one big one all over). That, and her desire to oppress women, gays, non-Xtians,et al. The situation would be hysterically funny if I weren’t so petrified.

  59. delphyne

    I can’t work out what people mean when they say Palin is inexperienced or unfit for office. She’s no less experienced than Obama and in some ways is more, as she has actually had executive experience. I can understand any Democrat thinking that a Republican is unfit for office, but as it isn’t being said about McCain, I’m wondering if it is because she’s a woman. The only other alternative I can think of is that her lack of an Ivy league degree is figuring in people’s opinions about her.

    What’s interesting about Palin is that her candidacy has kept the sexism of the progressive left (both from men and women) front and centre. From that point of view her running for VP has been a good thing for women, whether she’s a feminist or not. Also from McCain’s point of view it was a terrific political move – he’d be nowhere if he hadn’t included Palin. Women being insulted by McCain choosing her are missing the point – they are being treated as a real political constituency rather than a group that can be taken for granted and ignored.

  60. josiemysourceofmostfrustration

    This article by Rebecca Traister at Salon about what Palin means to feminism may be the best thing that I’ve read on the subject:
    http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/09/11/zombie_feminism/

  61. The Bittersweet Girl

    I share with everyone here a sense of absolute terror about what is unfolding before our eyes. I didn’t think it could get any worse. I didn’t think that even rabid evangelical pro-war anti-choice wackos could possibly look at the last 8 years and vote Republican. And now? Palin casts a coy look over the top of her glasses and they all melt? I don’t get it.

    I had been planning a Take America Back party for Nov. 4 but now I’m afraid it might be a Leaving the Country, Greenland or Bust party.

    P.S. Twisty, hope you don’t have to spend the weekend in Plano (hack, spit).

  62. other orange

    Delphyne, you missed a part of one sentence, so I have edited it in:

    “Women being insulted by McCain choosing her are missing the point – they are being treated as a real political constituency that votes as a homogenous block based only on identification with other vagina-havers rather than a group that can be taken for granted and ignored has essential dignity and common sense.”

    There.

  63. Kay Em

    Twisty – perhaps I am naive to be swayed still by fear-mongering news, but Ike sounds terrifying. Take care?

    Josiesourceofmyfrustation – thank you for that link to Salon. Two paragraphs on the first page perfectly sum up my current deep, black depression – that Clinton’s competence is unpalatable in America, and that Palin’s “utterly digestible . . . feminism without feminists” is popular, and being defended by the last political party on earth I would expect to do so.

    I think Palin is the Brandeis Brief of politics (apparently Wikipedia now hails it as a groundbreaking legal brief full of policy). The Brandeis brief accomplished the goal of permitting legislation that reduced women’s working hours, but it was chock full of sexist BS about how women were completely incapable to do much of anything except pump out babies.

    If you believe the ends justify the means, then Palin is a good thing – a woman who has an excellent chance of entering the second highest political office in the nation. Once she is in, and the US populace is convinced we are all NOT going to die by having a female leader, then Palin’s VP paves the way for future women, those who are more feminist, to enter the Whitehouse.

    However, I think the Brandeis brief is a load of crap (legal gods smite me now), and that the first and second waves of feminism accomplished a hell of a lot more than a bunch of white old men reading briefs that stroked their egos did. Therefore, Palin, McCain, Obama, and Biden have finally convinced me to do something I have not considered since I have been old enough to vote – stay the hell home. And I live in Ohio. I hate all of the candidates enough that I honestly do not care who gets into office.

    Before someone brings up Palin’s anti-choice stance – go read the HHS regs for Aug. 20 (effective Sept. 21). Choice is over and dead.

  64. orlando

    Palin is a colonized woman (term coined by Anne Summers, if you haven’t read Damned Whores and God’s Police, do. Specifics are about Australia, but the premise applies everywhere). Every colonizing power co-opts support from members of the colonized class by extending to certain of its members privileges usually only available to the rulers, while making sure to find opportunities to remind them that their membership is honorary, and contingent on their assisting to opress others of their class.

    At least if McCain/Palin were to win (and I’m not for one moment suggesting that it would be anything but a disaster for America and the world) no one would ever again be able to say that a ticket with a woman on it is unelectable.

    (Aside: I would also like to register my fanship of the Rev BDL.)

  65. delphyne

    Otherorange, I wasn’t only responding to your remarks – the McCain is insulting us because OMG he chose a woman! complaint has been everywhere. Does being a woman in the republican party make a woman a more insulting choice whenever she’s picked than the equivalent man would be?

    Obama was also considering a man who has only been in his governor’s job for two years – would men be being insulted because he was planning to pick someone as equally inexperienced as him? (Are men insulted because they are being expected to vote for someone with as little experience as Obama even?) The answer to that is no they wouldn’t because voting for the penis isn’t seen as icky or wrong as voting for the so-called vagina (you do realise that the people who are using that phrase are just finding another way to call women cunts don’t you?).

    McCain chose Palin because he needed someone to appeal to his evangelical base, he needed someone with charisma to unite the Republican party (do you really think there are many women or men who could make than nomination speech to the RNC as a rookie and rouse the troops the way she did?), he’s planning on driling in Alaska and Palin knows the political territory there, he needed someone with so-called maverick credentials to match his which she has whether people like it or not, and he chose her because yes a woman this year would be an electrifying choice – which it is because everybody is talking about her and Obama has even stupidly turned his campaign around to go against her which makes him look weak. She has talents, she has abilities, she has a track record, she has a base to appeal to but for some reason a whole lot of people can’t see past the fact that she is female so automatically she must be useless and she must be an insult. It’s a double standard.

    She is not worse than any equivalent republican man on the ticket so the hoo-ha and *outrage* about her are down to misogyny. There is nothing wrong with picking a woman candidate even when it is the republicans doing it.

    I hope everybody read that Traister article BTW because it’s a textbook example of getting in touch with your inner sexist. Traister wants a bitch-fight between Hillary and Palin and finds herself unaccountably shaken to the bones by her and wants to see her destroyed. Bet she never felt that way about Dick Cheney and that’s because of misogyny. We’ve still got a long way to go.

  66. Cass

    “I can’t work out what people mean when they say Palin is inexperienced or unfit for office.”

    Have you been awake the last eight years?

    “What’s interesting about Palin is that her candidacy has kept the sexism of the progressive left (both from men and women) front and centre.”

    For some of us, its kept the sexism (both from men and women) of charging rape victims for their own exams, and forcing them to carry their pregnancies to term “front and centre”. But I guess that’s a subjective thing.

    “Women being insulted by McCain choosing her are missing the point – they are being treated as a real political constituency rather than a group that can be taken for granted and ignored.”

    I can’t tell you how long I’ve waited for our very own Clarence Thomas.

  67. saltyC

    You know, I see Delphyne’s point. To say that the only people Palin appeases are women who only vote with their vaginas is a point uber-sexist Jon Stewardt would make:

    AMY GOODMAN: Do you think she’ll get some Hillary delegates?

    JON STEWART: The ones that were voting for her purely on gynecological reasons, maybe, but I think politically, no.

    Fact is, Jon may think of women as vaginas, but the angry McCain-Clinton voters aren’t about that.

    After hearing the Palin interview last night I am very upset, but what really made me upset was, Obama could have picked a woman. One who is in solidarity with women, there are so many in the democratic party, with tons of pull and clout. The fact that McCain found (albeit anti-woman) one and Obama didn’t does hurt.

    And anyway, I can understand people getting scared and frustrarted, but it’s not like the Democrats are really that much better. They’re not that pro-choice, the democratic platform even has a statement about needing to “reduce” the number of abortions, ceding the moral stance to the replublicans. Reproductive rights were severely curtailed during the Bill Clinton years, so was international aggression. He bombed and invaded too, I have reasons to believe Al Gore would have killed 2 million Iraqis too.

    I don’t need someone to list all the points where the democrats are better; I know, But I’m still not impressed.

    So I’m not married to the Obama ticket. I’m voting Mckinney. Hey that’s TWO women, and actual pro-woman women, so yeah, jon, to you I’m voting with my vagina. Just like you do everything with your penis.

  68. Greymuse

    If Palin’s soon-to-be grandchild is a girl, maybe she’ll spring for the wee princess’ first ever bikini wax before kindergarten.

    http://andromeda.qc.ca/?p=1155 . Yes, it’s rather unrelated to the topic. If anything, it ranks with the high heel booties for crib dwellers.

  69. delphyne

    “Have you been awake the last eight years?”

    You’ll have to explain what you mean. I’ve already said that if they are saying she’s unfit because she’s a republican then why aren’t people saying the same thing about McCain? She has about the same amount of experience as Obama, yet somehow because she’s female this makes her singularly unfit.

    “I can’t tell you how long I’ve waited for our very own Clarence Thomas.”

    Yeah because Palin is a porn-using sexual harrasser. That’s such a good comparison.

    If you want to look for a woman-hating candidate look no further than Obama. His campaign used misogyny as a political tactic.

    We need a new book after “Right Wing Women” – “Liberal Women who ignore the sexism of men on their side”. Both seem equally a problem for women’s liberation.

  70. larkspur

    Delphyne: I think you are willfully misinterpreting the point here. Palin is not unfit because she is a Repubilcan. She is not unfit because she is a women.

    I acknowledge my lefty bias, but even taking that bias into account, Palin has not demonstrated that she has what it takes to be a vice-president and possibly a president, things like judgment, historical perspective, Constitutional scholarship, or simply a real solid sense of some fundamental tenets of American government, history, or society. She hasn’t learned enough about the things that matter to be a prospective head of state.

    It doesn’t sound like she has been a very good executive at either the town or state level, either, although I’d be willing to reassess that with more information. She seems to have exploited her position in ways that are materially damaging to her electorate. She is intellectually incurious. She reminds me of George W. Bush in many respects.

    Delphyne, I don’t know if you really want to consider my point of view. I have responded as though you do. If you are simply venting or soapboxing, well, hell, my friend – have a nice day.

  71. Brigid

    Sarah Palin is a self-hating tool of the patriarchy.

    Camile Paglia is a fuckhead.

    IBTP

  72. Eliza

    I’m tired of the simplistic comparisons of Obama’s and Palin’s experience in terms of counting months and years, and of estimates about executive experience based on average assumptions about mayors and governors. We already know that being a governor in Texas is nothing like being governor of NY or Ohio, because it’s a weak executive position and the State Lege is part-time. So you have to look at specific cases.

    Sarah Palin’s executive experience is minimal, when you consider that she was forced by the party to hire an exec. admin. to run Wasilla for her. The interview with Charles Gibson showed me once again that she does not know anything about the world, and she lacks curiosity as well as information. We’ve gone down that road before, and it took us to hell. That’s the real problem with her. Well, and her anti-feminist position on things like reproductive justice and rape kits.

  73. Gayle

    “We need a new book after “Right Wing Women” – “Liberal Women who ignore the sexism of men on their side”. Both seem equally a problem for women’s liberation.”

    Sing it, my sister!!

    The Democratic Party allowed Scalia, Roberts and Alito on the Supreme Court, and all without a fight. They don’t fight for choice although they are more than happy to use it as a battering ram against women voters every 4 to 8 years. Their own sexism drove them to push for the defeat of HRC in the Primary and their arrogance led them to dismiss her out of hand as a potential VP candidate.

    They opened the door for McCain and Palin themselves and –IMO– they are about to lose another Presidential race.

    So go ahead and be “terrified” and “horrified” and whatnot. Just don’t forget who got us here.

  74. wiggles

    A deeply disturbing thought has occurred to me that, since HRC dropped out, the closest thing we have to a feminist on either major ticket is Joe “her doctorate is a problem” Biden (see VAWA).

    I’m Palind out and past caring. I’m numb I tell you. Numb. I’m resigned to snoozing until Nov 4, when I’ll vote for McKinney and hope the Greens make a big enough showing this time to get a mic at the debates next time.
    (I lie. I’ll be watching all the debates and tearing my hair out at all the logical fallacies, deflections, and tone-deafness from either side. But I’m still voting for McKinney.)

    I’m sorry about the pain-in-the-ass scary hurricane, Twisty and all other gulf-coasters. I blame the P and its megatheocorporatocratic affinity for climate-changing pollutants and wetlands destruction.

  75. Natalia

    The problem with Palin is that she doesn’t ignore sexism as much as co-opts it. If turning other women into broodmares is what it takes for her to get all the way to the top, she’ll do it. Not because she’s “evil” or whatever, but simply because she suffers from the same delusions as George W. Bush – she is the Decider, you see. She can do no wrong, since God is on her side.

    In this sense, she isn’t a surprising pick for VP at all. Basically, she’s Dubya, with a coating of “down-to-earth regular American” on top.

    I hope that the American public can see through that facade quickly enough.

    The past 8 years have been disastrous. Time for a change. It’s as simple as that.

  76. BigFish

    Gayle you are so RIGHT ON that they must have invented the phrase in your honor.

    Don’t forget what women did — feminists did not support Cinton! Feminists supported Obama. They could have forced him to pick Clinton for VP, but instead they set it up for McCain to make a master chess move.

    “Terror” “horror” abortion used once again to scare women into supporting the people who could care less about feminism, who don’t give a damn if their followers are RABID sexists — I used to keep count of the number of times male Obama supporters used the word “bitch” to describe Clinton. After they went over 100 with the “b-word” I’d had it. I am indeed voting for McCain now, and I believe in punishing the democrats for their sell out of women! Bottom line, get the woman in the White House, stop whining and get the job done, because that will open more doors for more women.

  77. Tarr

    Is it time to head for the cave in the Ozarks now?

    Twisty (and other horse people) – you might enjoy this blog:

    http://www.fuglyhorseoftheday.blogspot.com/

  78. monika

    I wanted to clarify re: the rape kit issue. Is this something Palin would have had control over as mayor? Where I live (in canada) that is a provincial, not municipal, issue.

  79. Heather

    Don’t these guys (and I include Palin) realize that if they get rid of abortion there will be more liberal, feminist babies who will vote their asses out of office for all time?

  80. Apostate

    Ah, sanity in the feminist blogosphere (but I admit I’ve stopped reading most feminist blogs).

    My take on the Palin question is here:

    Palin as an insult to feminists.

    Money quote: Palin is one of the women who helped to make Offred a slave.

    And here:

    Women, Power and Feminism.

    Money quotes:

    Women are not always our friends.

    Ayaan Hirsi Ali, survivor of female genital mutilation, did not suffer that mutilation at the hands of her father. Her grandmother mutilated her against the express wishes of her father.

    Palin is no Thatcher. She isn’t even a Bhutto.

    And today:

    A Double Standard?

    Money quote: I personally wouldn’t bother to talk about Palin at all if liking her was not being made out to be feministically acceptable (even desirable) by certain feminists I used to like.

    (I think I’ve managed to get Palin out of my system now though… sorry to spam Twisty’s comments with links. I hope, Twisty, that you are well and safe.)

  81. kate

    No Heather, there won’t be if the Republicans have their way. Those impoverished, disadvantaged, neglected babies if they don’t grow up in prison or spending all their adult time trying to get one foot out of the gutter, they will be near illiterate, easily malleable and ready to be ruled.

    We’re getting closer to that ideal everyday. The average American who goes graduates high school and either moves directly into the workforce or first to a third or second rate college, will have developed no critical thinking tools to discern what the hell is happening to them.

    All news stations will merge into one giant conglomerate that will soothe the confusion and frustration of the masses with simplistic scapegoating and misinformation. Its already happening, we just haven’t reached the pinnacle yet, but we’re getting there.

    Pretty soon the internet will no longer be a place of free discourse, Homeland Security will be monitoring peace rallies and “liberal” groups (they already do to some extent) and people will be shuttered away to jail without hope of representation or even knowing the charges against them. We’re getting there.

    Palin is only the part of the cancerous rot that we can see, the real mastitis is hidden deep within the psyches of the powerful and the functioning of the government it feeds.

    I know I can’t leave the country, so I’m stuck here, waiting for the day when we all live in fear of our neighbors, when the national guard roams the streets and takes people in the night.

    Yes, I’m concerned on a feminist level, but I’m also deeply concerned for our future as a civil and stable society in general. I really am.

  82. FatWhiteMaleEngineerHumanist

    To those of you who, like me, were sorely disappointed when Hillary Clinton did not secure the democratic nomination, I’d like to gently remind you of some relevant history.

    The 1968 DNC was held in Chicago: Hubert Humphrey won the nomination over Eugene McCarthy by a large margin. Humphrey was a fairly progressive person, and had a history of championing civil rights. However, many of the most liberal parts of the Democratic Party were pro-McCarthy, including much of the anti-war movement. McCarthy was an excellent person; I hated the goddamn war and desperately wanted him to win.

    Significant numbers of these liberal Democrats were so angry they decided to support the Republican presidential candidate rather than have anything to do with Humphrey.

    The snag was this: the Republican candidate was Richard M. Nixon. A strong statistical argument exists saying the liberal Democrats that voted for Nixon were a deciding factor in his victory. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face!

    The next president will almost certainly select 3 replacements for elderly liberal-voting Supreme Court Justices: the impact on Roe v. Wade is obvious.

    I don’t want to vote for Obama, but it seems that he is by far the less evil of the two. There’s no way in hell I’m staying home on Election Day, and I don’t want the modern-day incarnation of Richard Nixon to be the next president.

    Thanks for reading; please be careful.
    David

  83. tinfoil hattie

    David, the overwhelmingly male U.S. Congress/U.S. Senate have done SQUAT to protect Roe v. Wade for the last 8 years. It’s hilarious that all of a sudden, after dragging Hillary Clinton through horrific misogyny not just during her campaign but since Bill Clinton was president, the left is wringing its collective male hands and urging WOMEN, for dog’s sake, to “please be careful” and do the right thing by voting for Barack Obama — no friend to women at ALL, he.

    YOU please be careful, David. YOU make rape a CRIME instead of a shameful mantle to be borne by its victims. YOU stop letting women be public property. YOU start dismantling the patriarchy. Women always do the clean-up work. How about if YOU do some of the ugly, dirty work instead of admonishing us little gals to watch our step and not put The Fate Of The United States Of America At Risk By Not Voting For Obama.

    When Obama EARNS my vote, he’ll get it.

  84. speedbudget

    Monika–

    She signed off on the law. Here ya go:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-alperinsheriff/sarah-palin-instituted-ra_b_125833.html

  85. Cass

    “So go ahead and be ‘terrified’ and ‘horrified’ and whatnot. Just don’t forget who got us here.”

    Lots of things have got us here, most especially the politics of accomodation that that the Clintons and their friends in the Democratic leadership have preached for years. And nothing in the Democratic primaries demonstrated that Hillary had seen the error of her ways, from her refusal to apologize for the war vote, to threatening nuclear war, to race-baiting among the rubes in Pennsylvania and Indiana. A Clinton-McCain matchup would’ve been, I suspect, drearily predictable: she would’ve tried, vainly, to convince Middle America that she loved patriarchy too, and John McCain was a wonderful, honorable man, and she was just as ready if not more so to slaughter foreign innocents without a second thought. The Republicans, meanwhile, would’ve portrayed her as a atheist, Marxist, radical feminist America-hating witch. And given the choice between Republican and Republican Lite, America would’ve gone, as usual, for the real article, and we’d have been stomped.

    All of those were reasons, right or wrong, that myself and many other feminists chose to cast our votes for Obama or the other alternatives. I’m very aware of the misogyny used against Clinton in the campaign, but I don’t buy the argument it was any more egregious than the racism employed against Obama. And while I can understand women still being very angry about this misogyny (I understand it, in fact, very well) I don’t get your sense of entitlement. Whatever gave you the idea the primaries were supposed to be a coronation? How could so many of you put forth the argument that my vote, and the votes of the majority of Democrats should’ve been nullified just because you happened to think your candidate was better? And finally, who the fuck are you to tell me or anyone else that I’m some depraved anti-feminist simply because I didn’t vote your way?

  86. Cass

    “I wanted to clarify re: the rape kit issue. Is this something Palin would have had control over as mayor?”

    Yes, her hand-picked police chief instituted the policy, unique in Alaska at the time, after she got rid of the previous chief. She signed off on the new policy every year.

    http://www.eschatonblog.com/2008_09_07_archive.html#4448862878393645250

    Alaska has, by far, the worst rape and sexual assault rate in America.

  87. delagar

    Furthermore, have you seen her policy on wildlife? The whole shooting wolves from the air issue? Polar bears? Her attitude toward science? Her abuse of power? How she used her religion to get elected? This isn’t just an anti-woman candidate, this is an evil candidate. I don’t care whether you’re a democrat or a conservative, you should be against her.

  88. Virago

    “I’m very aware of the misogyny used against Clinton in the campaign, but I don’t buy the argument it was any more egregious than the racism employed against Obama”

    “I don’t get your sense of entitlement.”

    And what about your sense of entitlement. You say you recognize the sexism against Clinton, but you choose to ignore that said sexism was widely tolerated by the mainsteam media while the racism was not. The racism against Obama was condemned outright, and the sexism against Hillary was either ignored, or if it was pointed out, they acted like feminists were making a mountain out of a mole hill. Anything to benefit your candidate I suppose. Why don’t you vote for Sarah Palin? After all, you seem to agree with her that Hillary should stop “whining” about sexism. You can both be in denial.

  89. Cass

    “Why don’t you vote for Sarah Palin? After all, you seem to agree with her that Hillary should stop ‘whining’ about sexism.”

    What I said was:

    1. I personally didn’t think she was the best candidate.

    2. As appalling as the sexism was, I think she lost, legitemately, to Obama for many reasons aside from sexism.

    3. I think think the candidate who wins the most delegates and the most votes in the primary system should be the nominee.

    4. I don’t believe I’m an anti-feminist for having chosen vote for Obama.

    If you want to argue one of those points, go right ahead, but I’m not going to play the straw woman for you.

  90. delphyne

    “Palin has not demonstrated that she has what it takes to be a vice-president and possibly a president, things like judgment, historical perspective, Constitutional scholarship, or simply a real solid sense of some fundamental tenets of American government, history, or society. She hasn’t learned enough about the things that matter to be a prospective head of state.”

    I think what you’ve described would mostly qualify you to be a law professor (or lecturer which Obama was). Is that what you are getting at? All those things are part of what would qualify someone for vice president, but they aren’t the full story by any means. Palin has other qualifications, like her executive experience, like her knowledge of the oil industry in Alaska, like her ability to lead which do make her fit for the job. Being a governor is a qualification for even higher office – Reagan, Clinton, Carter all demonstrate that. On the other hand you don’t get many constitutional professors jumping straight from that occupation into the White House.

    I knew it was the lack of the Ivy league degree that was getting to some people. Classism rears its ugly head once again.

    As for the supposed smallness of Alaska, Howard Dean was Governor of Vermont, a tiny state with a population similar to Alaska’s. Nobody thought that that limited experience meant that he was somehow unqualified for being president.

  91. Cass

    “And what about your sense of entitlement. You say you recognize the sexism against Clinton, but you choose to ignore that said sexism was widely tolerated by the mainsteam media while the racism was not.”

    “Chose to ignore”… where in my comments did you draw that conclusion? Does not “choosing to ignore” equate automatically with supporting the candidate that’s being unfairly attacked?

    “The racism against Obama was condemned outright…”

    Yes, it was thrilling to see our mainstream media show such restraint over the Rev. Wright affair.

    “…the sexism against Hillary was either ignored, or if it was pointed out, they acted like feminists were making a mountain out of a mole hill.”

    It was indeed shocking to again find out, as we do every election, every time we turn on the TV, and every time we open our eyes, they we live a profoundly sexist society. But again, does that mean I’m going to change my vote to a candidate I consider second best?

  92. monika

    Thanks speedbudget and Cass. I wanted to make sure that if I bring this up to people that it was in fact something Palin was responsible to people.

    You know, I can’t think of anything more atrocious than charging survivors of sexual assault with their own rape kit. I really can’t.

  93. other orange

    Palin has other qualifications, like her executive experience, like her knowledge of the oil industry in Alaska, like her ability to lead which do make her fit for the job.

    Oh, goody- so we’re now considering close ties to big oil as a positive rather than a negative in the presidency. She doesn’t just have knowledge of the oil industry in Alaska- she practically serves the oil industry in Alaska. She’s led prayer meetings focused on getting permissions for more pipelines. I’d say her massive conflict of interest (and her willingness to reshape the USA into a theocracy) makes her unfit for the job.

  94. delphyne

    I didn’t say it was a positive, I said it was a qualification. Once again can you tell the difference between “Palin is unqualified” (a sexist judgement that women face all the time no matter how good their qualifications are) and “Palin and McCain shouldn’t win the election because I disagree with their policies and their track records”. The latter is not sexist, the former is.

    Also a conflict of interest happens where a politician benefits personally from the policies they enact. There is no evidence that Palin supports the oil industry for any other reason than ideology, in fact her husband resigned from his low level oil industry job when she was negotiating the pipeline. Thus there is currently no conflict of interest there, she is simply wrong in our eyes.

  95. Virago

    “I don’t believe I’m an anti-feminist for having chosen vote for Obama”

    If you thought Obama was a better candidate on the issues than Clinton, fine, I don’t begrudge you voting for him. In fact, I think he’s a better candidate on the issues than McCain/Palin, and I intend to vote for him this fall. I would’ve voted for him originally if I felt that he was better than Hillary on the issues. But I don’t think he is, and that’s why I was a Clinto supporter. However, I don’t think that she lost legitimately against Obama. What I have a problem with is the fact that a lot of Obama supporters choose to turn a blind eye to the different ways that racism and sexism were dealt with when Hillary was in the running. Again, I said, that the racism against Obama was outright condemned in the mainsteam media while the sexism against Clinton was either ignored or watered down. The ironic thing is that Sarah Palin is telling Hillary to stop whining about sexism, and she is getting the same treatment.

    “you want to argue one of those points, go right ahead, but I’m not going to play the straw woman for you.”

    By denying that the sexism was far more tolerated than the racism, you already are playing the straw woman.

  96. Cass

    “I knew it was the lack of the Ivy league degree that was getting to some people. Classism rears its ugly head once again.”

    Yes, that’s what its all about; look at all the unwarranted respect our current Yalie president has gotten from us! And here’s some more elitist, latte-sipping ugliness for you: I genuinely object to the fact she believes the world was created in seven days. I don’t like politicians who try to ban books. It scares me to death that an American VP candidate has no idea in 2008 what the “Bush doctrine” consists of. And to me, the fact that she believes she has a special pipeline to God that gives her the license to control women and kill people makes her actively evil.

  97. delphyne

    I tell you what, all those liberal doods who have been holding Roe vs Wade over progressive women’s heads in order to threaten them into supporting Obama – I hope if abortion were to be taken from US women all those righteous dudes would stop fucking women and risking getting them pregnant. I’m sure if it did happene they would give up their right to penetrate women because they care so much about women’s bodies and forced pregnancy. That is what they tell us after all.

  98. delphyne

    “I genuinely object to the fact she believes the world was created in seven days.”

    There’s no evidence for this. She hasn’t stated what she believed. Please share your source if you have one.

    “I don’t like politicians who try to ban books.”

    Which books did she try to ban? Name one.

    “It scares me to death that an American VP candidate has no idea in 2008 what the “Bush doctrine” consists of.”

    Charlie Gibson looked like he was struggling a bit too in defining it when she thew it back at him.

    “And to me, the fact that she believes she has a special pipeline to God that gives her the license to control women and kill people makes her actively evil.”

    Nope another lie.

    This is what she said about the Iraq war:

    “Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God,” she exhorted the congregants. “That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”

    In other words pray they are doing the right thing, not that god tells her they are doing the right thing.

    http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html

  99. Cass

    “Which books did she try to ban? Name one.”

    This story has been almost literally everywhere.

    “Back in 1996, when she first became mayor, Sarah Palin asked the city librarian if she would be all right with censoring library books should she be asked to do so.

    “According to news coverage at the time, the librarian said she would definitely not be all right with it. A few months later, the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, got a letter from Palin telling her she was going to be fired. The censorship issue was not mentioned as a reason for the firing. The letter just said the new mayor felt Emmons didn’t fully support her and had to go.

    “Emmons had been city librarian for seven years and was well liked. After a wave of public support for her, Palin relented and let Emmons keep her job.”

    http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1117009&srvc=2008campaign&position=15

    “There’s no evidence for (Palin’s belief in creationism). She hasn’t stated what she believed. Please share your source if you have one.”

    This is literally true. Like many of even the most radical Taliban-Republicans, she squirms when asked to state what she really believes for the record. She’s argued in favoring teaching creation “science” alongside evolution in school, which could certainly be seen as a cynical attempt to appeal to the most reactionary and anti-intellectual elements of this society, as opposed to evidence of actual belief. The Reader must decide which possibility is worse.

    “Charlie Gibson looked like he was struggling a bit too in defining it when she thew it back at him.”

    Struggling, that is, very hard not to embarrass her; this is ABC News, remember. Anyway, for Charlie, Sarah and whoever else, here it is: attacking potential (supposed) threats before they become active (supposed) threats. Not too hard, was it? And i’m not even running for national office!

    On the pipeline to God thing: she has stated that her opposition to female reproductive autonomy under all circumstances comes from her faith. That is, of course, removal of other people’s freedom based on a supposed knowledge of God’s will. Does she share George II’s faith that God tells him to invade other nations? You’re quite right I don’t have direct evidence of that, but we all also have reason in the world to be suspicious of those stances of humility or “compassionate conservatism” members of the evangelical Right customarily assume in our public life. Past experience shows that they’re almost always fake, and their followers know it. Hence the reason for their great enthusiasm.

    And that, I’m afraid, uses the amount of time I can allot each week to arguing that reactionary idiots are exactly what they appear to be. Next week, perhaps, we can discuss how poor Phyllis Schaefly has been unfairly demonized by the Obama-loving liberal establishment. Until then…

  100. Virago

    “Yes, it was thrilling to see our mainstream media show such restraint over the Rev. Wright affair.”

    Well, gee, Obama not too long ago brought his two little girls on stage so that they could tell their father via camera, “We love you daddy” in front of the whole world. Hardly a word was said. Hillary had her ADULT DAUGHTER Chelsea VOLUNTARILY working on her campaign, and people were saying she was “pimping out her daughter.” Just another sexist example about how women are held up to a different standard than men when it comes to parenting. It was thrilling to see our mainstream media show such restraint especially when it comes to Clinton’s clothes, hairstyle, her “shrill voice”, calling her the c-word. But that’s okay, just don’t call Obama the n-word.

  101. emily

    Delphyne said:

    “I knew it was the lack of the Ivy league degree that was getting to some people. Classism rears its ugly head once again.”

    I’m sorry, but Palin is not a leader of the caliber I am looking for in a VP and – I’m sorry – she comes off as very, very small-minded and unintelligent. And yes, the fact that she went to 5 mediocre colleges in six years does not speak well of her mind or ability to succeed in an academic setting. That is not classism. Obama was raised by a struggling single mother and went to the best universities we have. Palin stopped her education after undergrad, and never spent more than a year at one university. She has gotten into power in Alaska by using wedge issues and public speaking skills – not real administrative talent.

  102. delagar

    delphyne, the books Palin thinks don’t belong on the library shelves include Daddy’s Roommate and Go Ask Alice. Kevin Drum, among others, has a couple of post up on it. Go have a look. When the Wasilla librarian told Palin that no, she would not remove the books and, in fact, the ACLU would have something to say about any attempt to remove books, Palin’s “crew” started disappearing books from the library on their own, apparently. (This is exactly the tactic that the local fundamentalist churches take here in Fort Smith, Arkansas, by the way: I’m quite familiar with it.)

  103. Rolan le Gargéac

    The Bittersweet Girl

    …but now I’m afraid it might be a Leaving the Country, Greenland or Bust party.

    You’ll need to go further than Greenland, Jeebusland will be annexing that quite soon due to its unparalleled access to the arctic etc.

    Natalia

    Not because she’s “evil” or whatever, but simply because she suffers from the same delusions as George W. Bush – she is the Decider, you see. She can do no wrong, since God is on her side.

    Perfect encapsulation. Rem acu testigi.

  104. Aunti Disestablishmentarian

    Tinfoil Hattie:

    Right Fricking ON.

    The Dems have been courting the “swing voters” in the middle, and rightly so. However, they have been doing this to the exclusion of their base– and to those other “swing” voters on the far left.

    If the Repubz can create an unholy alliance between old school conservatives and the Religious Righteous, certainly the Dems can figure out a way to make overtures to the lefties who are being left out in the cold at the same time.

    Of course they fail to do this, and wonder why we laugh when they complain about people opting out. Granted a number of those who vote third party do so on principle, and will never be swayed by the unity pony, but a large number would be up for coalition if offered an ear.

    I swear, if I hear one more Democratic jackass blame me for putting a Republican in office, I’m gonna bust a fallopian tube. Again.

  105. goblinbee

    Kay Em (or anyone), what are the HHS regs?

  106. Jezebella

    Uh, Delphyne, really? REALLY? You’re defending Sarah Palin? What on earth has possessed you to wander out on that particular limb? Have you seen her interview? She’s a nightmare.

    Re: new Health & Human Services regs which are intentionally vague on the definition of “abortion,” essentially bringing all forms of birth control and emergency contraception into the broad terminology, therefore allowing HHS to deny all of these medical services to women:

    http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=SubmitComment&o=09000064806da3bc

  107. Jezebella

    Sorry about the “Uh,” Blogmaster. I had a lapse in judgment.

  108. Shelby

    Shit Twisty I hope you’re OK. I’m Australian. I saw Texas on the news this morning with more devastating Ike pictures coming through now.

    We have compulsory voting here in Oz and although sometimes it is a pain in the arse with small local government elections, I consider it a privilege and a good idea.

    We are getting alot of Palin in the news. Of course, don’t like her politics or frankly lifestyle choices. Do you really think there is a possibility of a black man winning the oval office over old right whitey? Shit I bloody hope so.

  109. soopermouse

    It might be very useful to this debate to not be started on obvious lies as premise. By doing so, you only manage to compromise yourselves.
    Let us start:
    1. She does not believe in abstinence only education. On the contrary, she supports teaching condom use in sex ed.
    2. She did not cut off funds for pregnant teenagers. On the contrary. http://wthrockmorton.com/2008/09/04/our-operating-budget-was-not-reduced-director-of-teen-center/
    3. She has not at any point tried to impose her religious beliefs upon the state of Alaska.
    4. Yes, she is anti abortion. However, she is pro contraception.
    5. Of the list of books that Palin allegedly wanted banned, some of those weren’t even published at the time. The librarian claiming this was someone whom she wanted to fire, and who is related to a police chief that Palin fired ( for lying to the city council). What chance is there that the librarian would be objective?
    6. She did not argue for teaching creationism or ID. She stated that the debate should be encouraged, but ID shouldn’t necessarily be on the curriculum.

    If people would start wearing their Obama issued horse glasses they might realzie that as of now, McCain is winning, because of Palin. Which makes the “Palin was a bad choice” an incredibly stupid statement.

    It might also be a worthwile exercise to remember whom she’s running against. Obama is no friend of women. Neither is Biden.

    For whoever mentioned “it’s fun until someone loses an eye ,in whis case rights”, it is the democrat candidate who has alrady costed you your rights -FISA, anyone? Whih one of the candidates has stated that mental problems are not a good enough reason for late term abortions? Clue: it wasn’t Palin.

    For the name of Dog, stop projecting, attack Palin on her actual stances not on the leftie bullshit memes that have already bene debunked 2000 times and at least have the decency to admit that three quarters of the attacks you perpetrate against her are sexist.

    You’re afraid of losing the separation of Church and state? Then you might want to have a look at Obama’s stances including the FBOs that he thinks should provide social services- continuing Bush’s support of said FBOs over government run social services.

    Conclusion: yes, let’s talk about Palin. Let’s criticise her on facts, not rumours and falsehoods.

  110. soopermouse

    Also: Sarah Palin on feminist issues

    Sarah Palin on combining motherhood with a career: “To any critics who say a woman can’t think and work and carry a baby at the same time, I’d just like to escort that Neanderthal back to the cave.”

    Sarah Palin on her ability to govern Alaska while raising children: “My answer would always be … that I’m going to do the job just as well as any male governor who had kids, you know, I think we can handle this.”

    Sarah Palin on raising her children to embrace gender equality: “Because I have both boys and girls I have a greater respect for equality and making sure that gender is not an issue and that everyone is treated equally.”

    Sarah Palin on being a “pro-life feminist”: “I believe in the strength and the power of women, and the potential of every human life.”

    Sarah Palin on contraception and sex education: “I’m pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues. So I am not anti-contraception. But, yeah, abstinence is another alternative that should be discussed with kids. I don’t have a problem with that. That doesn’t scare me, so it’s something I would support also.”

    Sarah Palin on supporting McCain instead of Hillary (March 2008): “But I have to admit a little bit of guilt there for not being able to jump on Hillary’s bandwagon, because I would so love to see a woman president. I think our nation is overdue there. So, I’ve said along, ‘Heck yeah, America’s ready for a woman president.’”

    Sarah Palin on being the first female governor of Alaska: “I’m the first female governor in Alaska, so that’s brought with it kind of a whole new chapter in Alaska’s life. Like my husband — up here they refer to him as the ‘first dude,’ not the first gentleman. And Todd… A whole new chapter here when Todd is asked to do things like — and he graciously complies and he has a good time doing it — hosting, as he did a couple of weeks ago down in Juneau, our capital city, the former first ladies tea party. And he does just great at things like that, as well as working in oil fields, with snow machines and in commercial fishing. That’s a dynamic here that’s of interest to others.”

    Sarah Palin on Title IX, sports, and growing up with gender equality: “You know I grew up with Title IX, and sports were so big, and in my upbringing very instrumental in shaping my character and a need to compete and really to win. So because of a very athletic background and growing up in a family, a busy large family, where gender never was really an issue there. My dad expected us to be back there chopping wood and snowmachining with the rest of them, hunting and fishing and doing all those things that are quite Alaskan.”

    Sarah Palin on sports, scholarships, and the beauty pageant: “Graduating high school in 1982 there weren’t a whole lot of high-school athletes, females going on to college to play sports yet. That’s what I was looking for, a scholarship in athletics. I didn’t get one, the next best thing would be the Miss America scholarship pageant where at least you had to show that you had a talent. I played the flute and was really into music so, you know I won a couple of titles there, and it paid tuition through four, five years of college. So, that was OK, it wasn’t really my thing, I was never really comfortable with it, but it paid for some college, though.”

    Sarah Palin on the challenge for Hillary and other women candidates to appear “tough”: “I recognize that Hillary seems to be trying real hard to be tough, but I say, more power to her. I think she’s had to do that. It’s unfortunate that she’s had to do that, but she comes across to me as tough, capable. I can respect that in her, that she is that tough, capable and experienced and all that….I recognize that’s what she’s trying to do and I think it’s unfortunate that maybe a woman candidate feels that she has to go there. You don’t see male candidates doing that.”

    Sarah Palin on dealing with the double standard applied to women candidates: “Fair or unfair—and I do think that it’s a more concentrated criticism that Hillary gets on so many fronts; I think that’s unfortunate. But fair or unfair, I think she does herself a disservice to even mention it, really. You have to plow through that and know what you’re getting into. I say this with all due respect to Hillary Clinton and to her experience and to her passion for changing the status quo. But when I hear a statement like that coming from a women candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism or a sharper microscope put on her, I think, man, that doesn’t do us any good. Women in politics, women in general wanting to progress this country, I don’t think it bodes well for her, a statement like that. Because, again, fair or not fair it is there. I think it’s reality and it’s a given, people just accept that she’s going to be under a sharper microscope. So be it. Work harder, prove to yourself to an even greater degree that you’re capable, that you’re going to be the best candidate.”

  111. other orange

    If you wanted me to like Sarah Palin, you could’ve left off that last quote where she says women shouldn’t “whine” about actual unfair treatment.

    So, let’s play the quote game !

    Sarah Palin on teaching creationism in schools (October 2006): “Teach both. You know, don’t be afraid of information….Healthy debate is so important and it’s so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject — creationism and evolution. It’s been a healthy foundation for me.”

    To a question during the 2006 AK gubernatorial debate, whether she would support a daughter’s decision to have an abortion upon being raped: “I would choose life.”

    Sarah Palin on Ron Paul: “[Ron Paul is] cool… He’s a good guy… He’s so independent. He’s independent of the party machine. I’m like, right on, so am I.”

    Well, I’m sold.

  112. Mar Iguana

    I wonder how much of a bounty Palin would put on a soopermouse body part. Probably not the $150 bounty she, personally, put on every wolf leg brought in by aerial “hunting.” Can’t have those nasty wolves competing for her mooseburgers, can we?

    You’d want to think twice before messing with her cheese, soopermouse. A mouse could get nuked that way.

  113. virago

    “Also: Sarah Palin on feminist issues”

    Even if you hope to clear up our “misunderstandings” of Sarah Palin’s position, I think you should be reminded that Sarah Palin backs up McCain, and he has an awful track record on feminist issues. It’s McCain that’s running for President, not Palin. McCain chose Palin for a reason, and it isn’t because she’s pr-feminist.

  114. virago

    “Sarah Palin on contraception and sex education: “I’m pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues. So I am not anti-contraception. But, yeah, abstinence is another alternative that should be discussed with kids. I don’t have a problem with that. That doesn’t scare me, so it’s something I would support also.””

    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/01/1320417.aspx

  115. soopermouse

    And Obama has an equally awful on feminist issues partner, not to mention that he is himself not quite an angel. Which leaves what?

    She likes Ron Paul? So do I on that particular stance, even if I disagree with the rest of his views.

    So, does someone have to fully agree with you on everything in order to be a feminist or just a decent human being? How about we have a talk about the attacks against her and the underlining message- that regardless how much a woman would do, it’s never going to be good enough for the people that YOU support? Or is it ok for the male democrats to use the system that oppresses women in order to advance their own careers but a woman republican is “a nightmare” for doing the same thing?

    In case you haven’t noticed, in most countries where women came into power for the first time, they were conservatives and had to learn how to use the system to their advantage. That is how Patriarchy works, and it is the reason why it has to be brought down from within.

    Just because Palin doesn’t agree with you on all issues that doesn’t necessarily make her an awful person. Maybe you need to ask yourself why do you hate her so much and what does that tell about you.

    She’s inexperienced? She is significantly more experienced than Obama, but you won’t say that. One wonders why people who should know better subscribe to the worldview that whatever a woman does it would never be enough.

    As for teaching both ID and evolution? 64% of Americans agree with that. Not to mention that she has stated that she doesn’t necessarily want to teach both, but to allow debate, and that creationism doesn’t necessarily have to be taught in school.

    So Palin would choose life if she was raped? It’s her choice to do so and unless you have any evidence that she had or would force someone else to do the same, you are just someone bitching about her fucking rights over her own body.

    McCain isn’t running against a wall. Let’s put this election in context and see who is it that he is running against. The comparison is quite interesting.

    At leas McCain didn’t steal the nomination from a woman who was 100 times better prepared than he was.

  116. delphyne

    You don’t have to be sold on her otherorange, you just have to stop supporting sexism against her.

    “Uh, Delphyne, really? REALLY? You’re defending Sarah Palin? What on earth has possessed you to wander out on that particular limb? Have you seen her interview? She’s a nightmare.”

    Uh, Jezebella, which part of being a feminist and defending women from sexism do you not understand? It really shouldn’t be this hard in a feminist space.

    Sarah Palin is a bog standard republican, her views are nothing special in that milieu, yet because it’s a woman stating them suddenly she’s the most evil person any democrat has ever come across. I’m sorry but I find it completely pathetic. I wasn’t joking about the “Liberal Women” book, we really do need to get to the bottom of why even feminist women are willing to put down their principles and start taking sexist pot shots at another woman just because her politics are the opposite to theirs.

  117. delphyne

    “Struggling, that is, very hard not to embarrass her; this is ABC News, remember. Anyway, for Charlie, Sarah and whoever else, here it is: attacking potential (supposed) threats before they become active (supposed) threats. Not too hard, was it? And i’m not even running for national office!”

    Charlie Gibson embarrassed himself, Cass. He talked to Palin with total contempt. How dare he suggest that it was hubristic for her to accept the VP nomination, he would *never* have said that to a man. Repeat after me – “sexism is not acceptable even towards republican women”.

    As for the Bush Doctrine, here’s what Charles Krauthmammer, the guy who first coined the term says about it and about Charlie Gibson’s stupid question. Palin was right to try and pin him down because it has had about four different meanings during Bush’s term:

    “If I were in any public foreign policy debate today, and my adversary were to raise the Bush doctrine, both I and the audience would assume — unless my interlocutor annotated the reference otherwise — that he was speaking about the grandly proclaimed (and widely attacked) freedom agenda of the Bush administration.

    Not the Gibson doctrine of preemption.

    Not the “with us or against us” no-neutrality-is-permitted policy of the immediate post-9/11 days.

    Not the unilateralism that characterized the pre-9/11 first year of the Bush administration.

    Presidential doctrines are inherently malleable and difficult to define. The only fixed “doctrines” in American history are the Monroe and the Truman doctrines which come out of single presidential statements during administrations where there were few other contradictory or conflicting foreign policy crosscurrents.

    Such is not the case with the Bush doctrine.

    Yes, Sarah Palin didn’t know what it is. But neither does Charlie Gibson. And at least she didn’t pretend to know — while he looked down his nose and over his glasses with weary disdain, sighing and “sounding like an impatient teacher,” as the Times noted. In doing so, he captured perfectly the establishment snobbery and intellectual condescension that has characterized the chattering classes’ reaction to the mother of five who presumes to play on their stage.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html

  118. saltyC

    Obama could have easily picked a woman as running mate, there are so many powerful women in the Democratic party.
    And it’s true, he’s not a very strong supporter of reproductive rights either, as someone mentioned before about him saying that mental health was not a good enough reason to abort. Cause you know women need to have a rilly rilly good reason to not be forced to continue a pregnancy.

    Then he apologizes for an abortion comment he made—but not that one! The one where he said that the question of when life begins is “Beyond his pay grade” he had to clarify that abortion is a “Moral issue”.

    This is the heart of why women keep losing reproductive rights: the Left cedes the moral ground to the right. It’s even on the Democratic platform that we need to “reduce” the number of abortions.

    Sorry, lefty dudes, you can’t scare me. I’m voting for McKinney.

  119. Tigs

    [quote]And Obama has an equally awful on feminist issues partner, not to mention that he is himself not quite an angel. Which leaves what?”[/quote]

    Obama himself has said some pretty obnoxious things, but his stances on birth control, abortion, equal pay, child support collection, support for VAWA (which I think is questionable in terms of policy efficacy, but is a rubber stamp in opposing dv), are all pretty fundamental pro-feminist policy positions.

    Delphyne, you’re right that feminists need to stand up and reject sexism against Sarah Palin, but I don’t think it’s as simple to dissect out what sort of critiques are influenced by sexism as you seem to think.
    I question her experience more than I question Obama’s for several reasons. Being not terribly far apart in age, they both have similar amounts of life experience. I reject her kind of experience.
    The majority of Palin’s professional experience is as a sports journalist. The majority of Obama’s professional experience is as a community organizer. I value the skills and foundation that community organizing brings over sports journalism.

    The both held intermediary elected office, Palin as a member of city council and then a mayor of a town of about 4000 residents. Obama was a State Senator for Illinois. This is clearly a discrepancy. I live in a town of about 4000 people; I am politically active in my town. I know how what little experience this confers in terms of national policy. Animal control issues? I’d trust Palin— running a government? Not so much. Being a member of a large state legislature is a seriously different level of political experience than serving as mayor or on the council of a small town. It’s obtuse to pretend otherwise.

    I think people have a point in comparing their positions as governor and US Senator. Two years in either position is not a terribly substantial amount of time. Were Palin governor of a more populous or strategically important state, I don’t think this could be raised as an issue at all. But Alaska has a little more than a quarter of the population of the borough of Queens (Fewer than 700,000 Alaskan residents).
    Obama, along with Dick Durbin, represents 12 million people from the State of Illinois.

    I don’t like Palin’s political/policy positions. I don’t think I’d like her if I met her. Are some of those things probably influenced by internalized sexism? Probably. And as a feminist, I should work that out, and make sure to call other people out when I see it.
    However, my rejection of her as one half of the Republican ticket is not a result of my internalized sexism. I think she and McCain would simply be awful for this country.

  120. soopermouse

    Here’s the thing: there is not a lot of difference between Obama and Palin’s positions on women rights. The only one I managed to find is that Obama is very tepidly pro choice (until it’s convenient not to be), as in he votes present instyead of voting against pro choice measures. Palin is against abortion, but pro contraception. Her experience as governor of Alaska, as in executive position 24/7 as opposed to Obama’s 183 days in the US senate( majority of which spent campaigning). Not to mention that Alaska is US’ first line of defense in the anti missile program and the governor is also the head of the national guard… and it’s not that insignificant anymore.

    Yet, here’s the thing: even women who consider themselves feminists would go against Palin with anger but allow Obama to get away with it. So the man can do it, but the woman is “a nightmare”, a horrible person, etc. Same women fail to even acknowledge the unbelievable sexist attacks against Palin from Obama and his campaign, thus allying themselves with those who make death wishes, rape threats etc against Sarah Palin.

    Whoever agreed to her internalized sexism was right, but needs to have a better look at the reason why she allow s the man to go free but castigates the woman for pretty similar positions.

  121. delphyne

    Yeah, I’m wondering about this need for people to pretend that Alaska isn’t important in order to do Palin down. It’s the number 2 state in the US for oil production and it’s Russia’s neighbour. What sort of strategy are we talking about here – the one that makes sure a man wins at all costs?

    Does anybody say that Biden is unqualified because his state is Delaware with a population of only 850,000? I’ve already mentioned Howard Dean and Vermont. How about Bill Clinton? Obviously he should never have been president because I’m pretty sure that Arkansas is a lot less strategically important than Alaska.

    She’s running for VP not president, the VP is a ceremonial position for everyone who does that job except Dick Cheney.

    I saw something on a PUMA site about how a year of experience for a woman equals five penis years for a man. Simply by possession of the magic penis we can assume that a man knows exactly what he is doing even if he’s never done anything like it before as in the case of Obama and his complete lack of executive experience. On the other hand being minus a penis means that everything a woman has done her that qualifies her for a job doesn’t actually count for anything.

    And please nobody come up with the “heartbeat away from the presidency” line. First of all it’s ageist and secondly if Palin were to become president she can do exactly what the other less qualified candidate has done and plans to do and appoint a well-qualified VP and surround herself with knowledgeable advisors. If it’s good enough for Obama why isn’t it good enough for Palin?

  122. other orange

    So Palin would choose life if she was raped? It’s her choice to do so and unless you have any evidence that she had or would force someone else to do the same, you are just someone bitching about her fucking rights over her own body.

    No, actually, read the setup: she said she would choose life if her daughter was raped. Exercising her “her fucking rights” to control a pregnant teen girl’s body.

    Same women fail to even acknowledge the unbelievable sexist attacks against Palin from Obama and his campaign…

    Must I, like Obama, once again explain that in the “lipstick on a pig” analogy, Palin is the lipstick ?

    Soopermouse, do you want to know the real reason that the Palin phenomenon makes me so angry ? Not Palin herself- I don’t hate her. (No, honestly, I don’t- I find her hypocritical and unusual, like many fundies, but hate ? I haven’t got the time.)

    I am so angered by the Palin phenomenon because I have waited and struggled my whole life (as I have watched my mother struggle and wait) to see a progressive woman on that stage- and now that a conservative woman, who holds beliefs utterly opposite of mine; who is anti-abortion and anti-environmentalism and anti-peace; now that she has made it to the top on the backs of real progressive women, I am supposed to be celebrating.

    Should we have shamed the students who turned their backs on Phyllis Schafly, because hey- a woman getting an honorary degree is still a woman getting an honorary degreee ? Alaska is in the top five states for rape and domestic violence against women- where is Palin’s platform on that ?

    I do see the sexism coming from every camp- liberals are no angels when it comes to this. But her platform is not pro-women. She’s attached herself to the anti-women party. I can’t rejoice just yet. I’d rather vote for McKinney, a pro-woman woman with an authentically feminist background.

  123. soopermouse

    She’s attached herself to the anti woman party? That’s cute, since it assumes that there is a pro woman major party. There isn’t one. If you haven’t learned anything in the past 2 years and especially in the past 9 months, I will spell it out to you: both parties are anti woman. None of them will do shit for women, and that is a fact. I could point you to Palin’s work on environment and not only, not to mention the “daughter” interpretation being a stretch of the imagination for people who have already made their choices and are now desperately trying to adjust the facts to excuse said choices, but that is not the point. However, by running and hopefully getting elected, Palin would have done more for feminism than most of not all of the democratic party in its curent shameful incarnation. Equal representation is a feminist principle that is at least as important as reproductive choice. Maybe even moreso, but that is a discussion for another day.

  124. Tigs

    I’m normally pretty good at not feeding trolls, but good lard, this sort of willful misleading on this blog has decimated my ability to resist.

    “Here’s the thing: there is not a lot of difference between Obama and Palin’s positions on women rights.”
    Obama is not actually running against Palin, so McCain’s policy positions are what matters when it comes to voting.
    Obama has a 100% NARAL rating for the past 3 years. Whereas NARAL is actively campaigning against John McCain, see their ad site: MeettherealMcCain.com.

    McCain opposed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and skipped the actual vote. Obama voted for it.

    And in regards to Palin on contraceptives. While she’s been very quiet about it, her stance seems to appear to be tepidly not anti-condom. I haven’t seen much on it, but my understanding via Feminists (sic) for Life and a few other places, is that Palin opposes oral and other hormone based (essentially all non-barrier methods) of birth control. If you forgive me my presumption, but I thought the main thing that feminists were pro-contraception for was so that they could control their own reproduction. Female controlled barrier methods have a substantially higher fail rate– in the case of the female condom, up to 21%.

    While I agree that the Democratic Party has not been a particularly zealous or effective champion of women’s rights, especially in recent years. BUT.
    Palin is not for women’s rights and it is utterly disingenuous to assert she is.

  125. blondie

    Palin opposes abortion in act, as well as in belief. She joined a “boisterous” line of abortion protesters outside a dr.’s office to disrupt his practice. See article at http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/15/bess/

    According to a retired Baptist minister from a town near where Palin was mayor,

    “Things got very intense around here in the ’90s — the culture war was very hot here,” Bess said. “The evangelicals were trying to take over the valley. They took over the school board, the community hospital board, even the local electric utility. And Sarah Palin was in the direct center of all these culture battles, along with the churches she belonged to.”

    This retired minister wrote a book entitled, “Pastor, I am Gay.” According to the salon article,

    “And after she became mayor of Wasilla, according to Bess, Sarah Palin tried to get rid of his book from the local library. Palin now denies that she wanted to censor library books, but Bess insists that his book was on a “hit list” targeted by Palin. “I’m as certain of that as I am that I’m sitting here. This is a small town, we all know each other. People in city government have confirmed to me what Sarah was trying to do.”

    Palin is not only frighteningly ill-prepared to be a heartbeat away from the presidency (foreign relations — My state is very close to Russia; Middle East — I wouldn’t second-guess Israel; Bush doctrine — babble about freedom), she is frighteningly fundamentalist on “social” issues. (in addition to the above picks out of the salon article, read the article to learn about dinosaurs and men walking the earth together)

  126. panoptical

    “by running and hopefully getting elected, Palin would have done more for feminism than most of not all of the democratic party in its curent shameful incarnation. Equal representation is a feminist principle that is at least as important as reproductive choice.”

    Is a male President and a female Vice President your idea of “equal” representation?

    Also, what makes you think that Sarah Palin “represents” women? That sort of sounds like you’re saying that anyone with a vagina can stand in for anyone else with a vagina regardless of what’s going on upstairs. Sarah Palin supported charging rape victims $300 – $1200 for an exam to gather physical evidence, in a state in which the rape rate is more than twice the national average. By what stretch of the imagination could anyone claim that this person represents women? How exactly would promoting this person promote feminism? If this were a man, nobody would have any problem calling him a nightmare, for women and for America.

    And the worst thing is, all of these arguments about her merits and qualifications are basically irrelevant. We’re talking about a Vice President – possibly the least important member of the entire federal government. The only reason anybody cares about any of this stuff is because she’s a woman. I don’t see Biden quotes being bandied furiously about the medio-blogoshere and dissected for hidden meanings. The actual issues in this presidential campaign have been – as usual – jettisoned by the republicans and their Orwellian, sleight-of-hand politics.

    And as for the democratic party, let’s give Clinton the credit she deserves – Palin wouldn’t have been on the table if not for the success of HRC’s campaign.

  127. soopermouse

    Actually, SHE didn’t charge the rape victims for the rape kits. The Wasilla police chief charged the victims’ insurance companies for them. This is not a singular measure, it si also common practice in, amongst other places, Illinois.

    The librarian is not a credible source because one of her relatoives, teh police chief, was fired by Palin. So was she, which makes her testimony not quite credible at best. In normal circumstances you would not believe what someone with an axe to grind has to say, but in this case you do because it’s Sarah Palin. What does that say about YOU?

    Yes, we are taking about experience. The bottom of the republican ticket is more qualified than the top of the democrat one. NYT has a very good description of what the governor of Alaska does for those who care about truth not smears.

    NARAL? They are too much of a political organization nowadays to be trusted. Doesn’t Joe Liebermann have a high Naral rating as well? Obama’s high Naral rating came from a bunch of present votes and did not change when he stated that mental issues are not good enough reasons for abortion. What does that tell you about NARAL?

    No, male president and female vice president is not my idea of political representation. However, it beats the fuck out of nothing and opens gates that are still closed. If she gets elected then many a woman will get to see a woman in a position of real power in this country, women who may or may not have time to wait for someonethat everyone agrees with. Maybe because there is no such woman and never shall it be.
    Purism doesn’t work. However small steps politics have worked for centuries.

    Nobody is denying Hillary Clinton her merit. She should have been the democrat candidate, and would have been should the democrats not hate women so much.

    There are more than one flavour of feminism. By concentrating on what separates them instead of what unites them, everyone loses. Reproductive choice, which is the cause du jour of white middle class feminists, is a lot less important for feinists from otehr walks of life. Have you considered that you might be incredibly classist and selfish to have it as a sine qua non condition? What about the feminists who have other sine qua non conditions?

  128. Lemur

    Palin isn’t feminist. She’s not. It’s possible that if McCain wins, something might happen to him. And Palin would be president. I always said I’d love to see a woman president, and I realize now I should have been more specific.
    She’s scary and disturbing and in NO way is she a feminist. And if McCain and The Tool of the Patriarchy win, I’m goin’ to Canada.

  129. sonia

    you can quote any profeminist things anyone has said at any given time but you’re missing one no-s— factor:

    politicians say things they don’t mean.

    politicians (and lots of people in general) say things aimed to come off a certain way and appeal to whoever’s approval (or vote) they want.

    to me, the proof of how a woman feels about women is whether she supports them when it comes down to the wire. like—-the option to have an abortion when you’ve been raped?

    that says more than a million “right-on!”s.

  130. monika

    I am hearing that there are many flavours of feminism. That may be true. But I would not support a woman (or any other) politician who is:

    1) anti-choice
    2) homo/bi/transhopbic

    These are my two minimum expectations for someone I would throw a vote towards.

    I would vote for a donkey before I would vote for Palin (although this is true of most politicians).

    It is not surprising to me that a conservative woman is the closest thing to the presidency of the u.s. of a. It is similar to white people’s reaction towards POC candidates – the more moderate the better.

    Well, anti-feminist is “moderate” – it appeals to the most voters.

    And as for the issue of making victim’s pay (either directly and/or through their insurance company) for their own rape kit, yes it happens in a lot of places and no that does not make it acceptable.

    In a city I used to live in (in Canada), rape kits would only be done if the victim immediately reported to the police (because the health region wouldn’t pay for them). This forced victims to decide sometimes hours after they had been assaulted whether or not to report to the police – not the best time to make an informed decision (given that the police could go for charges even if the victim didn’t want them to; in one city in the same province I lived in actually charged a victim because in order to make the charges go away she had to say that she lied about the sexual assault).

    I, along with others, fought this for years. To this day, I cannot recall if we were successful because of how totally fucked up the systems were. The people at the top were made very well aware of this policy and chose not to act. I hope I remember their names should they ever run for public office.

  131. Gayle

    “2. As appalling as the sexism was, I think she lost, legitemately, to Obama for many reasons aside from sexism.”

    Please. She “lost” because the Kennedy-Kerry-Pelosi wing of the party wanted someone pliable, and Hillary Clinton is no one’s stooge. She also “lost” because the MSM and half the Democratic Party believes the crap the Republicans said about her and they do believe it because of their own sexism. How many times did I hear Democrats call HRC a “lightning rod” and why? Because she said she didn’t want to stay home and bake cookies. (Oh, shudder.) If Hillary were Harry Clinton, there wouldn’t have been a contest.

    On policy, Obama is to the right of Clinton. He certainly did not win the Primary because of his progressivism. BTW, Obama’s first choice for VP was Tim Kaine, an anti-abortion Democrat. I wonder if people would have been so “terrified” by this choice.

    I can’t disagree with you more about how HRC would be doing now in the GE if the party had supported her. Our economy is tanking and we need a seasoned adult in the White House. Instead, the American people now get to choose between a neophyte and a disinterested war hawk. Super.

    Obama should have stuck to his original good judgment– he knew he needed more time in the Senate before he ran for President and said so just a few months before he jumped into the race. He was talked into running too early. All judgment went out the window when he refused to vet Clinton for VP. That showed immaturity and arrogance on his part and, as I said before, it opened the door for McCain’s Palin pick.

    As far as Palin is concerned, I’m no more “terrified” now than I would have been if McCain had chosen Bobby Jindel or, God Forbid, my former Gov., Mitt Romney. Neither man is pro-choice and neither is well educated about foreign policy.

  132. other orange

    Soopermouse,

    Are you aware of the implications of the word “cute” when dismissing a woman’s words ? If you’re not, check it out.

    You’re saying she’s good for feminism and you’re measuring her against your own criteria- when others hold her up to their own feminist standards (NARAL, etc.) you say that those aren’t the “real” standards for feminism. You say there are different kinds of feminism, but apparently only yours is valid.

    Also,

    Reproductive choice, which is the cause du jour of white middle class feminists, is a lot less important for feinists from otehr walks of life.

    Yeah, the “cause du jour” of the last eighty years or so. Clearly it’s one of our silly, fleeting lady whims. And I guess you think poor urban women don’t give a shit how many babies they have, huh ?

    I don’t know why I’m still responding to this.

  133. goblinbee

    “I always said I’d love to see a woman president, and I realize now I should have been more specific.”

    “to me, the proof of how a woman feels about women is whether she supports them when it comes down to the wire. like—-the option to have an abortion when you’ve been raped?”

    Lemur and sonia: word!

  134. Octogalore

    I was about to add an original comment until I saw the one by Gayle
    Sep 15th, 2008 at 7:06 pm. Thanks, Gayle! Now I get to do this:

    Ditto.

  135. larkspur

    Soopermouse: “…However, by running and hopefully getting elected, Palin would have done more for feminism than most of not all of the democratic party in its curent shameful incarnation….”

    Awesome. Don’t any of y’all ever wish we could do temporary mind-melds with people whose views seem so alien to one another? I mean, really. I would like to see the world through your eyes, sooper, delphyne, et al., for an hour or two. Just to see it, not to mess with it or trash it.

    Well, there’s no way to do it literally. And I can’t thnk of anything more I can add that would advance or enhance this particular bit of discourse. So, see y’all later.

  136. soopermouse

    NARAL? NARAL chose to support the man who voted present against teh woman who worked for women’s rights all her life. How in the hell can anyone give them any credibility after that is beyond me.

    “And as for the issue of making victim’s pay (either directly and/or through their insurance company) for their own rape kit, yes it happens in a lot of places and no that does not make it acceptable. ”

    You missed my point. Nowhere did I say it was acceptable. But it does ALSO happen in Obama’s home state, where he is a senator. How many of you have held him responsible for it? Show me one.

    Palin is homophobic/transphobic? Perhaps. Yet she has enough common sense to actually obey the law ont his as opposed to her own beliefs( see the benefits for same sex partners for teh employees of the Alaska government that she approve). I can’t ask for more. And last I checked, she did not parade aroung an anti gay “pastor” on a campaign tour like Obama did. Why don’t you hold Obama resposnsible for that as much as you hold Palin?
    “And I guess you think poor urban women don’t give a shit how many babies they have, huh ?”

    Actually Monique, you should not keep that classism where everyone can see it. It’s unseemingly for feminists and those who consider themselves as such.
    You assume I am white and middle class like you. I’m not. I’m non white (by western standards) inner city and poor. I am one of those women you so comfortably dismiss by assuming that they have to have the same priorities as yourself. Some are catholic : reproductive choice means shit to them, but surviving from one day to another is paramount. A lot of them have kids and have to work to support them- they will identify a lot more with Sarah Palin than with you. Some of those kids are the result of marital rape- they might throw a pot at you if you suggest they should have aborted them. Some couldn’t give a flyign fuck about the choice to have an abortion if said abortion is $400 which is what they make in 2 weeks of work.

    Is Sarah Palin a tool of the patriarchy? Yes, but so are you. You are fighting against the woman who’s closer to the white house than any other woman ever? With mysoginistic talkpoints originated on that bastion of woman hate called Daily Kos? You are therefore working for the advancement of the Patriarchy by maintaining the status quo- only men in positions of power.
    Other orange accuses her of “having sold her daughter;s privacy” forgetting that her daughter became a subject of discussion when Daily Kos – the people who she’s gotten that narrative from even if she doesn’t know it, accused Sarah Palin of being not the mother but the grandmother of little Trig, and she doesn’t evens see the irony. Virago accuses Palin to have cut the funds for pregnant teenagers, although the evidence suggests the contrary, as per the link I posted somewhat upthread. There is also no evidence that her children receive abstinence only education, yet Virago is happy to throw that little piece of shit her way.

    Do you even realize that by even discussing about her family you are feeding into the patriarchal narrative that a mother is responsible for all her family and that her family is her mirror? That you’re NOT discussing the male candidates’ families? That you are makign assumptions fed by pure hate, hate that places liek daily kos spew and you folow? This is divide et impera at its best, and this is why feminism keeps failing. Because some people would only accept their own points of view and everyone else is evil and a nightmare and a bad feminist if one at all.

    How much of your hate for Sarah Plain is because she doesn’t fit with your own narrow standards? That she isn’t a 2.6 middle class white picket fence feminist? How many of the accusatiosn you’re throwing at her, (and in doing so heping your patriarchal masters keep all women down) are rooted in your own classism? Having 5children is a working class thing. Middle class women don’t do that. Her teenaged daughter is pregnant therefore she is a horrible mother, and so on and so forth.
    Have you even examined your privilege and prejudice?

    Gayle is right. However, if the republicans would have chosen a man as VP, nobody would have scrutinized those men’s families and private lives. Men don’t get that sort of scrutiny. Michelle OBama wasshipped out to campaign with sexist slurs against Hillary Clinton. When her job was done she was sent back home, pacckaged into a more palatable wrapping, to take care of the kids and be quiet and non intrusive becausepeople were scared shitless fo a black and opinionated woman. Was she a tool of the patriarchy? yes. If her husband wins, her little girls will grow up in a world where no woman has ever been in the white house in a position of elected power as well. It might affect them less since they come from aprivileged family, but it will still be there.

    “Mammy, why there was never a woman president or vice president?” “Well baby, once upon a time in 2008 there was this bad woman who ran against your daddy for the presidential nomination. More people wanted her than they wanted your daddy, but your daddy managed to take the nomination from her. Then those bad bad republicans put a woman as VP to run against your daddy. But she was a mean mean lady who had 5 children and she was a trashy bad woman. Her daughter was pregnant at the time and she wasn’t even married. Nobody dared to put a woman on a ticket since”.

    How’s that for a narrative?

  137. Vinaigrette Girl

    Sooopermouse writes: “Reproductive choice, which is the cause du jour of white middle class feminists, is a lot less important for feinists from otehr walks of life.”

    The freedom to choose doesn’t coerce women to abort or argue that they should do so.

    The point is that as long as any woman, (whether it’s Bristol Palin or not) can get a legitimate abortion then it’s a valid and real choice. A woman who CAN’T make that choice because the “choice” is between [unwanted pregnancy baby] OR illegal abortion is oppressed.

    Sarah Palin is against that choice, for all women, regardless of class, creed, colour, or any other categorisation.

    I am a US citizen; I’m 51; I live abroad; I grew up at the not-well-to-do end of society as an Army brat in a culture which hated and under-paid the military, although both my parents are extremely well-educated indeed. My mum is a minister’s daughter (“They’re the worst, you know!”). Our family has branches with two kids, one kid, six kids, five kids, gays, divorces, plumbers, teachers, classroom assistants, small-town radio broadcasters, you name it, we got it.

    Nobody in our extended family of ordinary people thinks Sarah Palin is qualified: we don’t hate her, but we recognise that helping to run a country as complex and powerful and messed up as the United States in the world we live in – remember, we do share the planet? – takes more judgement, more subtlety, a wider and yet more rigorous view of the world than Sarah Palin is capable of having. And none of us belittle the achievements and experience which Obama and Lieberman actually DO HAVE.

    I WANT a president who understands constitutional law, unlike the present incumbent or Palin or Mccain. I WANT a president and vice-president who understand foreign policy as a process ofnegotiation and a partnership, rather than as a lone-cowboy “war”. Here in the UK a major trial of three Muslim terrorists was screwed up by the pre-emptive (“Bush doctrine”) action of the CIA in arresting a key Pakistani participant before the UK was able to use him to accrue crucial evidence of a more serious plot. This occurred because Bush sees the world in terms of a “war” which makes a nonsense of much of the rule of law we need to defend our actual freedoms. And i say this as the daughter of a career Army officer (who is, with all his military buddies, totally anti-McCain on purely military grounds).

    Sarah Palin doesn’t get it.

    I don’t think using one’s brain and applying thought to data in an ordered and rational way is “classist”.

  138. other orange

    So many assumptions, so little time, Soopermouse. First, my name’s not Monique.

    Second, feminists believe in choice. That’s c-h-o-i-c-e, not “have an abortion.” I’d never tell a loving mother she should’ve aborted a child, no matter what the circumstances surrounding conception. Because I believe in choice. Palin believes in life, a term that’s lost all meaning in the hands of the pro-war, pro-death penalty, anti-health care Republicans.

    I’m getting that you’re sick of hearing about abortion, so let’s move to another topic. How about health care ? Do I think health care matters to low-income women ? Being a low-income woman, hell yes I do. Where’s Palin’s health care platform ? Where is she working to change the lives of women and children in poverty ?

    You may identify with Palin’s working mother credentials, but I’ve got news for you: Palin doesn’t give a shit about you. Sarah Palin is wealthy and she is Republican, she lives in a mansion; the discussions of working moms, child care, health care, tax credits, the cost of food, etc. don’t touch her. They’re not even her issues. What are her issues ? Where’s her platform ? Oh, wait- isn’t that John “The Sanctity of Life” McCain’s platform ? John “100 Years in Iraq” McCain ? For someone who wants to hold men up to the same standards we hold women, you have not once brought up the fact that Palin doesn’t have a platform of her own because she has John MCCain’s platform. He’s happy to send working mothers’ children to die overseas. And, last time I checked, that guy wasn’t a feminist. Unless, magically, by making friends with a woman, he passes your new feminism test.

    Speaking of holding men and women to the same standards, Obama did get raked across the coals for his pastor’s words. How about Sarah Palin’s longtime pastor, who believes Alaska will be a refuge in the coming days of the apocalypse ?

    And as far as the “sold her daughter’s privacy” thing, I was assuming that privacy was bought and paid for when Palin herself marched her daughter onto a massive stage at the national convention. Also, how many of your accusations are made up ? Where did I say she was a bad mother ? She seems to love her daughter, and so she feels her daughter should be afforded the right to choose, a right she doesn’t feel should be extended to other people’s daughters. That doesn’t make her a bad mom- it makes her a lousy authority figure.

    I don’t read Daily Kos.

    And as I check my privilege, how about you check the fact that in your fairy-tale narrative, you had Michelle Obama’s daughter call her Mammy ?

    Good day.

  139. Amananta

    Note: Anti-abortion people sometimes claim to be in favor of contraception, but when you look into it more closely, they define most forms of contraception as abortion, including emergency contraception, the birth control pill, and IUDs. So when she says she is pro-contraception it is just another word game of the sort the religious right love.
    Is it really sexist to point out how obviously unqualified she is? Don’t mistake me for an Obama supporter. This is apart and aside from any of my feelings on the Democratic side (which heavily screwed up, in my opinion, when they railroaded Clinton out of the race – and they did, calling on her to quit repeatedly while she was still far ahead of Obama in delegates and polls.) Of course I’m all for a female president, and I would have supported Clinton in spite of several reservations about her stances. I am not so naive that I really think someone who supports everything I do has a chance of even getting near the Oval Office. But Palin is diametrically and loudly opposed to almost everything I support, in addition to being unqualified.
    If McCain were seriously trying to break the gender gap in the highest echelon of politics, he could have vetted Condoleeza Rice or one of the Republican woman senators or governors who have been politically active for years. Apart from the gender issue, he chose Palin to try to hone in on the “see I’m a maverick new kid on the block” phenomenon that surrounds Obama and as a shiny dangly toy for the religious right. She is by far more conservative – no, scratch that, she’s a reactionary – than any of the mainstream Republican women he could have chosen.

  140. Amananta

    As a former dirt-poor inner city mom I would like to say, yes, the right to have an abortion has always been very important to me. It’s mind-boggling that anyone can say that’s an issue only privileged white women care about when women are fighting for it the world over.

  141. Silence

    She inquired about banning books. She fired the local librarian when the woman wouldn’t toe the line. This is documented fact, and for me, that’s the end of the Palin story. No need to go into her stance on abortion, her lies about the bridge to nowhere, Troopergate, etc. She fails.

  142. other orange

    Amananta, yes, thank you ! My mom was a poor inner-city mom, and she’s the one who introduced me to feminism and did clinic defense and demonstrated for choice. So did many of her friends (moms she’d met through the public schools or through neighborhood associations.)

    Saying low-income women don’t care about reproductive rights (because it’s not just abortion, it’s women’s health and contraception and access to information and education) is in itself kind of classist- what, like they don’t think about that stuff ? Like they don’t worry when the price of contraceptives goes up, and right-wing pharmacists try to deny them EC, and the only women’s health clinic in their neighborhood closes down ? I’m pretty sure they (and we) do.

  143. monika

    I would like to clarify that not all of us who are against Palin are pro-Obama or were even pro-Clinton. As I said, if someone runs a donkey, I’d vote for it! But that doesn’t matter as I won’t be voting in the US election as I am not an American.

    I was not aware that Obama also was governor of a state that charged victims for their own rape kit.

    So that means that both Palin and Obama are shits for allowing this to happen. I don’t see a whole lotta choice for all of you who are American. You have my sympathies.

  144. delphyne

    “Is it really sexist to point out how obviously unqualified she is?”

    Yes. She has similar qualifications to Obama and she’s only going for the number 2 spot.

    I’m very interested to find out why Palin’s supposed lack of qualifications really bother people whilst Obama’s don’t. I did think that feminists saw through this stuff – the double standards that men and women are held to.

    Obama spent a couple of hundred days in the Senate before running for president. He was a part-time State Senator in Illinois, he has no executive experience unlike Palin yet he is going for the top job. Women here support him, they don’t care about his misogyny or his lack of qualification, he doesn’t frighten them the way they say Palin frightens them. It’s weird.

    “Awesome. Don’t any of y’all ever wish we could do temporary mind-melds with people whose views seem so alien to one another? I mean, really. I would like to see the world through your eyes, sooper, delphyne, et al., for an hour or two. Just to see it, not to mess with it or trash it.”

    You could always try reading a couple of radical feminist books – I recommend Mary Daly, Andrea Dworkin and Sheila Jeffreys for starters. That’ll probably give you a flavour of how I view the world if what I’ve written here really doesn’t make any sense to you. I can’t speak for Soopermouse though as I don’t think we’re on the same page about much of anything apart from the idiocy of trashing Palin because OMG she’s a woman! so she must be stupid/worse than any man/incompetent/inexperienced. Right wing women are allowed their point of view just as much as any left wing woman. They are also allowed to run for high political office if they want. We don’t have to agree with them to acknowledge their right to it and to do it free from sexism. Hillary Clinton said that Palin was an important new voice in the debate but she was wrong on the issues, that pretty much sums it up for me too.

  145. blondie

    I do not know who on this forum has been “trashing” Palin because “OMG she’s a woman!” What I have read are commenters who appear to support Palin only because of her gender and posters who argue that her gender alone is not sufficient to qualify her in the race for V.P.

    Nominating Palin only because of her gender is tokenism, which might almost be worth it to hear the Republicans suddenly bewail the sexism, oh! the sexism. Except the tricky part is that when tokens perform poorly in their token roles, the patriarchy says, “See what happens when you put a woman there? We gave the little ladies a shot, and they just aren’t up to the task. Governing is just not feminine.”

    I don’t recall who referred to Michella Obama as “Mammy” in her hypothetical, but … WTF? If that wasn’t a typo, well, I’m nearly speechless. You need to reboot.

  146. soopermouse

    Other Orange:
    which part of “some” you didn’t get? I did not at any point claimed that all low income women don’t care about choice. Emphasiis on “ALL”. What I did say and you misinterpreted was that some women have different priorities. “Some” and “all” are not the same thing. Stop fighting the strawman and address what I have actually said, not what you’d like me to have said. Because that is dishonest to boot.

    Next: there is a Monique upthread and I was talking to her.

    Palin “marched her daughter on stage at the national convention”? So did Obama. Where is your concern about his daughters’ privacy? Or is that OK because he is a man and thus owns his wife and daughters? Or maybe it is a standard procedure and in your eyes it’s only bad because a woman does it? Interesting.

    “Where’s Palin’s health care platform?”
    Now we’re getting somewhere. You see, you may not have noticed, but Palin is a Republican. She doesn’t have to run on a Democrat platform. It’s not her audience.

    Speaking of which, where’s Obama’s healthcare plan? The one where he expects the same insurance companies to suddenly decide to not make money anymore? Do I need to remind you that John Kerry made it very clear that UHC is off the table even with a Democrat president and a Democrat congress? Coincidentally, that is one of the very few things Obama didn’t go back on. Interesting. Maybe it is because his wife works for one of these overpriced healthcare providers, and her wages were tripled immediately after he was elected? One wonders.

    And no, you don’t have to read Daily Kos to further their narratives. You just have to spread misinformation without checking it first. That is how it works.

    And btw? I call my mother “mammy” as well. I know hundreds of families of various races, nationalities and so on where the mother is called “mammy” by her children. Take your sanctipony somewhere else.

    Silence: that is untrue. The librarian was fired over administrative issues. And since the librarian is a big supporter of one of her opponents, I question her honesty and motives.Start here http://www.nbc10.com/more/17431469/detail.html http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/bannedbooks.asp

    “Anti-abortion people sometimes claim to be in favor of contraception, but when you look into it more closely, they define most forms of contraception as abortion, including emergency contraception, the birth control pill, and IUDs. So when she says she is pro-contraception it is just another word game of the sort the religious right love.”
    And since you are a mind reader, you know exactly what she means by all the words she says, right?
    “I’m pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues,” or you could take her own word for it instead of your assumptions.

    Have you ever considered that there are people who might hold certain beliefs AND choose to not impose them upon others? If she is indeed homophobic but still made sure the same sexpartners kept their benefits, isn’t that a good note in her favour? As in she respects the constitution enough to not put her beliefs above it?

    Whether she felt like the right to choose should be extended to other women aside from her daughter is an interesting point. Because she has done nothing to limit anyone’s choice. At all. All you have, again is your assumptions that she would, because she is a Republican. Well I’ll be damned, apparently only women who agree with your agenda should have political careers. Amazing.

    Sidenote. For someone who is allegedly anti environment, turns out she cares quite a bit. See this http://gov.state.ak.us/archive-32531.html and this http://www.climatechange.alaska.gov/.
    Turns out that was another lie you propagated without checking it.

    Troopergate? Yeah, I’m sure you’d make sure the guy who tasered your 10 year old nephew (http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24325497-5012748,00.html) and threatened to kill your father stays employed.

  147. delphyne

    “What I have read are commenters who appear to support Palin only because of her gender and posters who argue that her gender alone is not sufficient to qualify her in the race for V.P.”

    I’m not supporting Palin, I’m defending her from sexism.

    Being a woman doesn’t qualify her to be VP – being a charismatic politician who has re-energised the republican base with one speech, having been a politician for the past 12 years or so, including two years as governor of Alaska, being a rising star of the right wing, having deep experience of the oil industry and its regulation, having so-called “maverick” credentials, all qualify her to be a republican VP in a McCain administration. Why is that so hard to understand, why do you keep banging the “unqualified” and “tokenism” drum when it is clearly nonsense and deeply sexist?

    I missed the “mammy” reference. Did someone really refer to Michelle Obama as that here? Oh dear god. Appalling.

  148. other orange

    Honestly, I don’t even really care whether Palin is qualified on paper or not. She has executive experience, there’s no debating that.

    But there is no way that I would stand up and say she represents women, women’s best interests, or working moms in general. She’s not a “new kind” of feminism. She’s not going “uplift” the women’s rights movement. I don’t believe that the goals of the feminist movement can be re-cut to mean that getting a woman, any woman; even one whose positions are explicitly anti-feminist; into a position of power is good enough.

    It’s not good enough. If anything, we have reason to believe that on the “Sanctity of Life” ticket, she would be active in anti-feminist agendas and anti-feminist legislation. How can we, as feminists, support these agendas ? We cannot ignore that she is McCai’s running mate and that they are a package deal !

  149. soopermouse

    umm, who said she was a new kind of femiist? All I said wa sthat she might be a feminist in her own way. Different things imo.
    Also, some of us who otherwise might be tempted to vote democrat, might not want to be on this side http://threadpit.com/store/product.php?productid=256&blogads=palin.

    Here’s the thing: even if she was the spawn of staan some people are so bent on making her to be, her getting elected still is a great step for women everywhere.

  150. Jezebella

    That was Soopermouse who used “Mammy” in her little narrative. Nice, right? That’s not a dog-whistle or a racist Freudian slip, no-ma’am-not-at-all.

  151. delphyne

    Raping Palin does seem to be a popular theme for some Obama supporters. There was this by a columnist at Huffington Post:

    “Michael Seitzman
    Posted September 11, 2008 | 11:21 PM (EST)

    Sarah Palin Naked

    She said “nucular.” Twice.

    I realized three things tonight. For one, if you are a McCain/Palin/Bush voter, you and I do not have a difference of opinion. We have a difference in brain power. Two, she really is as ignorant as I feared. And, three, she really is kinda hot. Basically, I want to have sex with her on my Barack Obama sheets while my wife reads aloud from the Constitution. (My wife is cool with this if I promise to “first wipe off Palin’s tranny makeup.” I married well.)”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-seitzman/sarah-palin-naked_b_125861.html

    Liberal women do need to take a look at the men on their side because a whole lot of them are quite as monstrous as the republicans.

  152. other orange

    Here’s the thing: even if she was the spawn of staan some people are so bent on making her to be, her getting elected still is a great step for women everywhere.

    How ?

    Why ?

    Seriously, can you explain this at all ? How would electing the pro-war, pro-corporations, anti-choice, anti-health care ticket help anyone at all ? I’m not interested in a token woman that the Republicans can hold up and use as an example of their “enlightenment.” I’m not interested in an anti-feminist VP with her own fundamentalist agenda. How does she help me ? How, as she legislates my rights and freedoms away, does she help women- any women ?

    As far as I can tell, Sarah Palin getting elected mostly helps Sarah Palin. Why aren’t you willing to talk about McCain’s awful platform, the agendas and issues that she has hitched herself to ?

  153. other orange

    Delphyne, on that we do agree- liberal men don’t get any kind of a pass from me for their sexism. I hated the sexist attacks on Hillary Clinton from the right, and nothing excuses sexist attacks on Palin from the left.

    That doesn’t mean, however, that I’m against any attacks on Palin- I happen to find her viewpoints and political platform a legitimate target.

  154. blondie

    being a charismatic politician who has re-energised the republican base with one speech, having been a politician for the past 12 years or so, including two years as governor of Alaska, being a rising star of the right wing, having deep experience of the oil industry and its regulation, having so-called “maverick” credentials, all qualify her to be a republican VP in a McCain administration. Why is that so hard to understand, why do you keep banging the “unqualified” and “tokenism” drum when it is clearly nonsense and deeply sexist?

    Palin’s qualifications for V.P.
    1. Charisma — if this were a qualification, my ideal Presidents would be George Clooney, Tom Selleck, Brad Pitt. You pick your charisma.
    2. Politician — gee, the status of being a politician is really respected, almost as much as used-car salesman or TV evangelist.
    3. Re-energized the Republican base with one speech — I would bet dollars to donuts that Palin delivered a speech that she did not write. The red meat that she threw out during the convention speech does not come from someone who could not speak to the Bush doctrine or who says, with a straight face, that she can deal with Russia because a little island of Alaska is within shouting distance of a little island of Russia.
    4. Having been a politician for the past 12 years or so — She has been a governor of a state with a population around 700,000 for fewer than 2 years, during which time, her husband was strangely/frequently present in the executive offices and received cc:s of official governmental e-mails. Odd. Prior to that, she served briefly on that state’s oil and gas commission. Prior to that, she was mayor of a town of approximately 5,000. Prior to that, she was on the city council. Am I leaving out any significant governmental experience? If that resume qualifies one to be a heartbeat away from the presidency, particularly in combination with the inordinate amount of scandal which has arisen from that paltry experience and her inability to speak to the press beyond canned speeches, then the mayor and governor of my little red state should be gleeful, cause they’re way more experienced than Palin. Hello, D.C. Mr. Smith’s comin’ to Washington.
    5. Rising star of the right wing — so was Karl Rove, not to mention Ralph Reed, etc.
    6. Deep experience of the oil industry and its regulation — the brief time she spent on the AK oil and gas commission? Even if that was significant, think how well Cheney has served the American public with his oil and gas “experience”
    7. “maverick” credentials — like what? hiring cronies (like the buddy she hired to be the state agriculture secretary because she really liked cows?) and firing civil servants if they refuse to do her bidding on things like banning books or firing the ex of her sister?

    You can fool some of the people some of the time, but calling Palin unqualified is not nonsense and is clearly not sexist. I would not consider my aforementioned mayor or governor qualified to be VP, and (gasp) they’re men! Crying “sexism” any time someone calls out a woman minimizes the valid complaint; so that when sexism does raise its ugly head, the weary listener thinks, “there you go again.”

  155. panoptical

    In her “Mammy” post, soopermouse also said:

    “they might throw a pot at you if you suggest they should have aborted them”

    I am hispanic. This is a sexist, racist slur against hispanic women. I have heard all my life about the tendency of hispanic women to throw cookware, but I have never once seen it occur outside of facile hollywood portrayals. I have seen my mother, my aunt, my grandmother get angry – very angry – and never once have I seen any of them throw anything. Here’s some news for you, soopermouse: us inner city urban folk of hispanic or mixed backgrounds can express differences of opinion without violent outbursts, just like everybody else.

    Not to mention the fact that you’re essentially claiming that poor, non-white women don’t care about abortion rights because they love to have large families with lots of children.

    I notice that on your blog you have been exhorting people to vote McCain since before he even chose Palin as his running mate. I suppose it’s simply too much to ask for a republican shill like yourself to check your aggressively racist words and attitudes at the door so that we can continue to have a civil discussion. However, I’m a sucker, so I’ll give it a shot:

    Could you please stop expressing yourself using racist, sexist stereotypes?

  156. blondie

    Thanks for the insight, panoptical. What I had noticed about that statement is that it expresses a belief that equates abortion with personhood.

  157. Vinaigrette Girl

    From Over Here (the UK, where I live although my vote remains Stateside) although some “liberal” men are easily just as damfool sexist as any other pair o’ cojones, Sarah Palin stands out as not only anti-feminist but hypocritical, and I wouldn’t care about it the way I do if she wasn’t being paraded as a victory for feminism.

    The point (this is for Delphyne and Soopermouse in particular) is that not any ol’ woman will do to make it for feminism. On that count, I would say Condoleeza Rice has made more of a case for feminism: I absolutely disagree with a good deal of what she does and with everything her boss has done, BUT SHE IS QUALIFIED.

    I’m sorry if this offends, but yes, achievement matters, and being governor of Alaska for a little while and mayor of Wasilla and a community college graduate and mother of five children ISN’T ENOUGH. We are talking about world politics here. Or at least I am, but maybe living outside the US has something to do with my POV. We’re the ones with a *lot* more direct experience of terrorism.

    And yes, knowing Constitutional law and editing the Harvard Law Review and being a community organiser and a Senator IS enough, along with having an experienced foreign policy wonk at your right hand, under the circumstances: we need someone with intellect right now, and neither Palin nor McCain have what it takes.

  158. delagar

    “Actually, SHE didn’t charge the rape victims for the rape kits,” says soopermouse, in the most pathetic defense of Palin I’ve seen so far.

    So if Palin didn’t show up at the hospital and run the credit card through the machine herself, we give her a pass for pushing the policy through and signing off on it? Because you do know that she pushed this policy through (she pushed it through) and signed off on it (Huffington Post has her signature, you can go look).

    She would rather free the rapist than take a chance on a woman reporting a rape and, therefore, maybe, who knows, taking Plan-B in consequence — cause that’s abortion, that Plan-B, you know.

  159. delphyne

    I really don’t get why so many folks are so impressed with Hah-vaad, one of the seats of the goddamned patriarchy. Meanwhile if you’re not a privileged privately educated person you get your scholarships to state school by doing beauty pageants. That should be a point in her favour amongst lefties, not a point against her, but somehow liberals can’t help revealing their contempt for the lower less monied classes.

    Meanwhile the misogynistic propaganda train chunters on:

    “1. Charisma — if this were a qualification, my ideal Presidents would be George Clooney, Tom Selleck, Brad Pitt. You pick your charisma.”

    I said charismatic politician, you do understand that you need both attributes to be successful don’t you? Bill Clinton and JFK are other examples of the breed. Sarah Palin is a new example, unfortunately on the right wing, but you can’t deny her popularity and appeal to her base.

    “2. Politician — gee, the status of being a politician is really respected, almost as much as used-car salesman or TV evangelist.”

    See above. I don’t understand why you are dissing politicians though, do you feel the same way about Obama being a politician?

    “3. Re-energized the Republican base with one speech — I would bet dollars to donuts that Palin delivered a speech that she did not write. The red meat that she threw out during the convention speech does not come from someone who could not speak to the Bush doctrine or who says, with a straight face, that she can deal with Russia because a little island of Alaska is within shouting distance of a little island of Russia.”

    Obama doesn’t write his speeches but you’re not holding that against him are you? Damn this sexism is beginning to make me feel quite sick. She did know what the Bush Doctrine was, she was right to try and pin down Charles Gibson on which aspect, because it has about four different meanings. Which aspect? was a good retort to that question. She said a lot more about Russia than its proximity to Alaska, but that got cut out of the broadcast interview, didn’t you hear? They wanted to make you look stupid. It isn’t however stupid to note that physical proximity to another country does tend to focus the mind on it.

    “4. Having been a politician for the past 12 years or so — She has been a governor of a state with a population around 700,000 for fewer than 2 years, during which time, her husband was strangely/frequently present in the executive offices and received cc:s of official governmental e-mails. Odd. Prior to that, she served briefly on that state’s oil and gas commission. Prior to that, she was mayor of a town of approximately 5,000. Prior to that, she was on the city council. Am I leaving out any significant governmental experience? If that resume qualifies one to be a heartbeat away from the presidency, particularly in combination with the inordinate amount of scandal which has arisen from that paltry experience and her inability to speak to the press beyond canned speeches, then the mayor and governor of my little red state should be gleeful, cause they’re way more experienced than Palin. Hello, D.C. Mr. Smith’s comin’ to Washington.”

    Oh my God you aren’t seriously saying her husband is really the one in charge? You didn’t really say that did you? What are you doing on a feminist site?

    “5. Rising star of the right wing — so was Karl Rove, not to mention Ralph Reed, etc.”

    I’m pointing it out as a qualification. I bet you didn’t say they were unqualified because in their case they are possessed of the mighty penis that you seem to so admire.

    “6. Deep experience of the oil industry and its regulation — the brief time she spent on the AK oil and gas commission? Even if that was significant, think how well Cheney has served the American public with his oil and gas “experience”

    And her time as governor of Alaska where she negotiated the pipeline and taxed the oil companies. I didn’t say she’d serve well, I said she was experienced. DO. YOU. UNDERSTAND. THE. DIFFERENCE?

    7. “maverick” credentials — like what? hiring cronies (like the buddy she hired to be the state agriculture secretary because she really liked cows?) and firing civil servants if they refuse to do her bidding on things like banning books or firing the ex of her sister?

    She never banned books, she never fired the trooper (he’s still employed) you’re talking bullshit and telling lies because you are *blinded* by misogyny. She blew the whistle on corrupt republicans in her state – that does give her those credentials. Has Obama ever blown the whistle on any of his corrupt friends? I haven’t heard him say a word about the crook Tony Rezko. Of course I’m forgetting the Penis Rules, men can do any old crap and no-one calls them on it, on the other hand you can make up any old crap about women and you will never be called on it either.

  160. Ermingarde

    I read on Echidne of the Snakes that Palin’s speech was written by the speechwriter who has written many of George W. Bush’s speeches. Did you see Tina Fey’s impression of Sarah Palin on SNL? Snerk.

  161. larkspur

    Vinaigrette Girl: …”On that count, I would say Condoleeza Rice has made more of a case for feminism: I absolutely disagree with a good deal of what she does and with everything her boss has done, BUT SHE IS QUALIFIED….”

    Oh, well-said, V-Girl. This is right to the point. And may I add that the opposite of “feminist” is not “sniveling self-hating pawn of the patriarchy who hates my guts and wishes I’d STFU and comb my hair”. To the extent I’m willing to consider the question of “opposite of a feminist”, the thumbnail import to me is someone who disagrees that gender inequality has a significant impact on the lives of women, and believes that one’s energies are better spent considering matters not specifically related to civil rights of women. That’s as non-judmentally as I can express it.

    But that’s an aside. The point is – and here’s an example – when I seek medical care, I prefer the provider to be a woman. I see a woman doctor at the clinic, and my dentist is a woman. It’s not hard to get care from a woman, at least in my area, because there’s so many qualified, experienced practitioners here. But I’m not going to agree to have my appendix removed by a doctor whose specialty is ophthamology just because she’s a woman. Why would I do that? Solidarity? Trying to not hurt her feelings? (And anyway, 99% of eye docs would say, “Hell, no, get a surgeon, stat”.)

  162. TwissB

    I apologize for breaking into this amazing discussion with an urgent off-topic appeal for a basic feminist cause: the “No On K” campaign opposing a San Francisco ballot measure (see http://www.noonk.net) to decriminalize prostitution in that city. Activist Melissa Farley is looking for a strong feminist cartoonist to draw an editorial cartoon illustrating a particular idea about the predictable effects of hanging a neon Welcome sign for pimps and traffickers on the Golden Gate bridge. If you are a cartoonist or know one who might want to contribute her talents, please contact Melissa at mfarley@prostitutionresearch.com.
    Background info: Melissa, a research psychologist, is author of the recently published study “Prostitution and Trafficking in Nevada: Making the Connections” As an oganizer, she, along with Annie Fukushima and others, were successful in defeating a similar decriminalization proposal in Berkeley, and have just scored a court victory in SF against the pro-K side who sued to – listen up anti-censorship people – remove the “con” language from the city’s legally required “pro-con” ballot statement. Like her friends Andrea Dworkin, Catharine MacKinnon, and Dorchen Leidholdt, she is the target of vicious attacks by misogynists like Ronald Weitzer.
    I hope that we’ll have an opportunity some day to discuss on this genuine forum the decriminalization/legalization and Swedish model responses to prostitution and trafficking.

  163. panoptical

    Every time a Republican says something, fact check it. It’s likely to be the opposite of the truth.

    In 2001, as a State Senator, Barack Obama co-sponsored a bill that would prevent women from being billed for their rape kits. Anyone who is interested in the story, sources, references, etc, it’s here. Also, google helps a lot in dealing with the right wing.

  164. Cathy

    Soopermouse, you’ve got some nerve suggesting the commenters here are “incredibly classist and selfish” for thinking reproductive choice is important. FYI, a number of them are old enough to not have to worry about unintended pregnancy, some are lesbian, and while I am neither, I am not sexually active so could only get pregnant if raped. We want all women to have a choice, not just ourselves. The wealthy republicans who can hop on a plane and go somewhere to get a safe abortion (yet refuse to allow funding so poor women could get one at a low cost, or even try to make it illegal) are guilty of classism and selfishness. Yes, I’m talking about your man, McCain, who thinks abortion would be a “family decision” if his daughter got pregnant, but for poor women and girls – tough shit, sluts. God’s punishment, you know.

    I understand that many poor women are just trying to survive and feed their families, but the surest way to fall deeper into poverty is to have another child. They have less time to join protest marches, but they certainly do care. You don’t seem to get this, so I have a very hard time believing you are in a low-income family.

    The “cause du jour” bit killed me too, other orange.

  165. other orange

    Thanks, Cathy- well said. Reproductive choice, and reproductive health, are so incredibly important to women of all backgrounds. And I’d say it’s particularly important to low-income women whose access to better health care is so restricted. It’s not selfish to be in a fight that benefits all women regardless of class, color and creed- because again, it’s not about abortion, it’s about choice. Choice and access and information and rights.

    But, you know, me and my fickle pro-choice whims ! Hee. At least we got a giggle out of it.

  166. soopermouse

    Yes panoptical, I have been exhorting people to vote for McCain. It has something to do with the utter repulsion I have for Barack Obama and most of his supporters and the way they treated Hillary Clinton in the primaries. I do not condone rewarding bad behaviour, and rewarding the people who stole Hillary’s nomination with votes seems a most idiotic thing to do in my opinion. Rewarding mysoginy with votes only serves to condone it and ensure its continuation.

    Psst: the racism accusation was played in the primaries. If you want to accuse me about being racist against my own ethnicity, you have a problem. It smells as desperate as the accusations thrown at Hillary Clinton in the primaries. Might even look like you don’t have any other arguments. Those of us with experience in logics and debate call it “ad hominem”. It happens to be a logical fallacy, but then agains someone linking to DK is probably used to that. You can take it and shove it, since in case you haven’t noticed- your guy is losing. But then again, once a Kossack, always one, right? What are you going to do next, link to the “Trig is in fact Brostol Palin’s son” diaries? How about the raping Sarah Palin ones? Come on, you know you want to.

    As for the anecdote, I have seen plenty and had to dodge more than one pot or dish when some discussions at home became heated. Even have a couple of scars to show for the trouble. Go figure. Goddamn anecdotes. Of course, not all inner city women are necessarily latin@, but that’s not the point, let’s give panoptical the desperate something to cling to.

    Psst: amazing how you forgot to mention that I am in fact a Hillary Clinton supporter. I guess that doesn’t fit with your little story.

    And amazing how your source is Daily Kos. A little digging around and it turns out that this is yet another measure Obama put his name on although someone else worked on it. Amazing what you CAN find when you use Google. There’s even a nice list of the things Emile Jones got Obama’s name on although he didn’t work one second on them.

    other orange: electing a woman as VP shatters the glass ceiling. As someone else said, the girls that are under 10 now wont know Palin’s positions. They will know that there is a girl, someone like them, in a very important position. Since it has already been demonstrated that encouragement, proper role models and belief in yourself do go a long way towards ensuring one’s success in life, especially in girls, this would probably be one less piece of sexism to internalize.

    Cathy: Obama thinks an abortion is something a woman decides with her family, doctor and pastor. Not much of a difference. Or have you missed the “a woman should have some control over her body” era at his website, 6 months ago back when there was a section called “women’s issues” on it?

    Ermingarde: Obama does not write his own speeches either.

  167. LCforevah

    I have been a feminist and liberal all my life, and I couldn’t stand Senator Clinton’s candidacy. As early as November of 2006, when she avoided talking about the Iraq war and instead was throwing out trial balloons about video ratings, I realized that she was still stuck in 1996.

    She surrounded herself with operatives from the former Clinton era, thus ensuring that the people around her would also have ten-year-old attitudes and strategies. Every false step she took in her campaign came from taking the bad, bad advice of her campaign staff.

    I never even got to the point of worrying about her experience, since her campaign actions were so clumsy. Just the way she kept repeating her fiction about coming under sniper fire days after it was proven bogus just showed me that she didn’t understand the Internet and its ramifications.

    From the beginning, Obama has run an up-to-the-minute, tightly disciplined campaign with nary a false step, the opposite of what Senator Clinton and her staff managed to do.

    More than anything, I’m voting for Obama because he has the unusual political gift of saying the right thing at the right time–and with the desired liberal attitude. It’s not true that he is the most liberal senator as the Rethugs repeatedly shout, but he’s the most progressive and damn fortunate lefty candidate we’ve had in a long time–something I just couldn’t see in Clinton.

    Reworking the shambles of our current foreign policy will require skads of that “right thing right time” bit.

    I wikied his bio and from the first day of his working life he was working for Chicago’s vulnerable folks. Neither Clinton nor McCain/Palin approach anything like his early commitments.

    It may be said that Clinton is the better, more experienced feminist compared to Palin, but neither have what Obama has at this moment.

  168. Inverarity

    “Rewarding mysoginy (sic) with votes only serves to condone it and ensure its continuation.”

    So what does rewarding McCain with votes do?

  169. Spiders

    You took the words right out of my mouth, Inverarity.
    Some of the sentiments expressed here are making me sick.

  170. soopermouse

    Inverarity: send a message to the DNC that their behaviour will not be tolerated AND helps finally shatter that glass ceiling.

    Lcforevah:
    Oh, another Obama fan. Just out of curiosity, are you oen of those who get paid to defend and blog about him? Because all of the platitudes and invocation of his ( proven false and incomplete) memoirs sure sound like them.
    No, neither Palin nor Clinton have what he does: a machine that defrauded milions of people of their votes, a monumental hypocrisy and a mysoginy obvious from orbit.

    Tell me, have you even accounted for the caucus fraud perpetrated by Obama’s campaign? Do that disciplined campaign also include the dirty and disgusting attacks against Hillary Clinton, her supporters and her family? ( sadly enough, after he threw more shit at her than a whole cage of monkeys he had the audacity to ask her to campaign for him. Yeah, he sure has that). Do the “sweetie” “claws come out” “periodically feeling down” “likeable enough” remarks fit into that as well? They have to, because he ran such a good and disciplined campaign, right? How about Michelle Obama’s sexist attacks on her?

    And to make this clear: I never said that reproductive choice was not an important issue. I am sick and tired of people who need to lie and distort my words because they can’t otherwise reply. That is called a “red herring” and it is also a logical fallacy. My point was that there are women for whom abortion is not an important or even relevant issue, yet they still continue to consider themselves feminists and act as such. I believe there can be antiabortion feminists and that they have a right to their own beliefs. This sort of fundamentalism espoused in this thread scared the shit out of me, because nothing good ever came from fundamentalism.

    MIND YOU Sarah Palin never said anything “anti choice” ( anti abortion is a completely different thing) and has never done anything to remove choice from other women, contrary to the lies we have seen here espoused by people who should know better. She made her personal opinions known, but there is not yet one shred of evidence that she would impose her opinions upon others. She is anti abortion with regards to her personal life. However I believe her behaviour is significantly closer to the actual concept of feminism than some of the ones I have witnessed espoused here. Not only the lies and misinformation, but unbelievable fanatism to a dogma that claims to be the ultimate in feminism. Should we call it “jesuit feminism”? “My way of feminism or the highway”? “If you don’t agree with me on everything you are scum and I will condone and support the lies and sexist attacks on you”? We sure have seen this behaviour here and it wasn’t even remotely pretty.

    My requests to have the men vetted the same way Sarah Palin is by virtue of lacking a penis seem to have unleashed the wrath of hell upon me for darign to disagree with the almighty sisterhood. Well, if this is what the sisterhood has become, fuck it. I don’t know what the fuck do you call this, but it sure as hell isn’t feminism.

  171. other orange

    Electing a woman as VP shatters the glass ceiling.

    Only for women who fit the “type”- you’d still be putting a super-feminine, super-religious “ideal mom” type in the White House, with all the associated negatives against an “unladylike” woman like Hillary Clinton. All you’re really saying there is that women still have to play the games, wear the lipstick and dance the “yes, sir” dance to get ahead- we all already know that. We were hoping for change, not a reinforcement of the patriarchy’s standards for success.

    As someone else said, the girls that are under 10 now wont know Palin’s positions.

    I’m assuming this will be because the Republican administration will no longer allow them the right to read.

    They will know that there is a girl, someone like them, in a very important position. Since it has already been demonstrated that encouragement, proper role models and belief in yourself do go a long way towards ensuring one’s success in life, especially in girls, this would probably be one less piece of sexism to internalize.

    Unless under John “Sanctity of Life” McCain sends them all to breeding camps; in which case all of this is moot.

  172. Cathy

    This soopermouse character seems rather disingenuous, and has probably been a McPain hack all along, never supporting HRC. Most real feminists can probably spell the word “misogyny,” and none would ever consider voting for McPain because of the way HRC was treated.

    S/he says, “Obama thinks an abortion is something a woman decides with her family, doctor and pastor. Not much of a difference.” No difference at all, if you’re very wealthy, which I suspect s/he is. S/he completely misses the point I was making, which was that there is a HUGE difference if you happen to be poor.

    Thank you, tinfoil hattie, for calling David out on his suggestion that feminists are stupid enough to vote McPain due to outrage at the sexism toward Clinton. This is a right-wing talking point which soopermouse has adopted, thinking it will lure voters to their side. Not gonna happen. But if anyone is planning to not vote, I would suggest voting for McKinney instead. She doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance (no one very good does), but a large number of votes for her might get the attention of the two major parties better than an equal number of no-shows.

  173. delphyne

    I don’t agree with Soopermouse on much at all but she’s been around the feminist blogosphere for a few years so its ridiculous to call her a hack or to try and smear her in that way.

    There’s a political movement called the PUMA movement which is full of Democrats, many of them feminists, who refuse to vote for Obama because of the appalling sexism he and his cronies in the DNC directed at Clinton this year, stealing the nomination from her. Some of them are voting for Cynthia McKinney, some of them are voting for McCain, some of them are writing Clinton in but they are united in wanting to stand up to the misogyny of the Democratic party. If you want to see more of them and what they are about go to The Confluence, Reclusive Leftist or PUMApac blogs. One other thing that they are all in agreement about is that the misogyny that was immediately heaped on Palin when her nomination was announced is yet more proof that the Democratic party hates women no matter what kind of lip service they pay to women’s issues, although from reading most Democratic arguments you’d think that feminism began and ended with Roe vs Wade.

  174. Cathy

    delphyne, I’ve read that the PUMAs were started by a McCain donor. Divide and conquer, one of their favorite strategies. I can’t understand how a feminist could possibly vote for McCain, no matter what Barack Obama did. It makes no sense. I know the Democratic party hates women. It’s astounding how many supposedly progressive men suddenly begin to sound like right-wing trolls as soon as any issues about women surface. The way many of them attack Palin (like that T-shirt soopermouse linked) is revolting, and I’m as pissed as you are. But I distrust anyone who claims that they are just as bad as Republicans. Democrats are an order of magnitude better than Republicans, and they only appear equal when compared to McKinney, who is a quantum leap better.

    Why vote for the party that hates women 100% because the party that hates us 50% pissed us off?

    I’m re-posting my comment from five days ago, still Lost in Cyberspace since I used the AOL browser.

    Palin: Talk about giving the P a blow job (can’t remember which commenter came up with that one; I love it)!

    If they manage to steal yet another election, I’m praying for a nearby gamma ray burst to annihilate us all and put us out of our misery. Moving to New Zealand will not help, since they’re destroying the whole world.

    I see no reason to defend this woman. She is hypocrisy personified. She and McPain are pathological liars, even rivaling King George II. I wish we could say, “Thanks, but no thanks,” to HER. Even if “progressive” men (who are complete phonies if they reject feminism) make sexist remarks about her, I wouldn’t try to clue them in by defending her. Maybe we should say, “Yeah, she should stay home in the kitchen and let a real woman, who knows what’s going on, run the show. Not clueless woman-haters like Palin and that dirty old man she’s campaigning with.”

    Perhaps we should all stock up on Plan B now, while it’s still legal (though difficult to obtain).

  175. soopermouse

    Cathy, your hipocrisy is painful to read, and you mnage to achieve it in one post. Damn that’s good.

    “Even if “progressive” men (who are complete phonies if they reject feminism) make sexist remarks about her, I wouldn’t try to clue them in by defending her. Maybe we should say, “Yeah, she should stay home in the kitchen and let a real woman, who knows what’s going on, run the show. Not clueless woman-haters like Palin and that dirty old man she’s campaigning with.”

    That makes you the same as the guy who designed that T shirt. Whatever you believe yourself to be, you are not a feminist if you’re saying that ony women who agree with you deserve to be defended and to have political careers. Just wow.

    Other orange: the apocalyptic view “vote for OBama or the world will end” is extremely unconvincing since teh Republicans already had 8 years to do all that shit. Turns out they didn’t. You are trying to use the politics of fear that Bush used so successfully in 2004 to scare women into voting for Obama. I don’t think it’s going to work.

    The fact that he has a D label on him does not make Obama a feminist, a feminist friend or anything else worth supporting. His actions during the primary and after speak loud enough to ring the alarm bells for everyone who is wiling to hear them. But the “willing” part is the issue. Not to mention that the guy who wanted so bad to vote for Roberts ( and only ended up not doing it because he was told it was a bad idea) does not stir any hope in people who’d rather not vote out of fear.

  176. Lar

    Inverarity, you read my mind. I couldn’t have worded it better, and I’m not going to try.

    In truly hoping that “Mammy” was a typo and wincing at the misspelling of “misogyny,” (a staple in feminist vocabulary after all) I suggest installing CleverKeys, or at least running the next retort through spell check a couple of times. I’m not trying to be arrogant, just saying…

    I’m with Spiders on this one.

  177. soopermouse

    Lar- English is not my native language and sometimes, especially when I am in a hurry, I might make typos. It happens. “Mammy” is a diminutive from mother, which some people spell “mummy” or variations thereof.

  178. Vinaigrette Girl

    Soopermouse, I get that you were a HRC supporter and can’t abide Obama. What I don’t get is why you think McCain is a good candidate for the presidency of the United States; unless you think that his choice of Sarah Palin is the deal-breaker for you, over-riding all other considerations.

    Please: explain, if you can without entering into guilt-by-association or personal arguments about other posters: what is it about McCain that makes him the right person for you?

    Try to spell it out for me, the American former Army brat living abroad in a country with many years of direct experience of actual terrorism (thanks to the IRA, mainly, but not forgetting July, 2007 and many near-misses and minor attacks since then).

  179. Natalia

    I tell you what, all those liberal doods who have been holding Roe vs Wade over progressive women’s heads in order to threaten them into supporting Obama – I hope if abortion were to be taken from US women all those righteous dudes would stop fucking women and risking getting them pregnant. I’m sure if it did happene they would give up their right to penetrate women because they care so much about women’s bodies and forced pregnancy.

    Delphyne, I want to make sure I’m not willfully misinterpreting your words, so I want to ask you: do you think that all of these women who are being penetrated, as you say, are doing it against their will? Or that women simply don’t want to be penetrated, at all, but are duped/pressured into it? I know what Dworkin wrote on the matter, but I want to hear your thoughts.

    Because, it seems to me, if you believe *specifically* that, then abortion rights don’t really matter. After all, you don’t have control over your body to begin with. Either way, you’re getting used by the doods.

    Janice Raymond has written about how abortion is a tool for men to escape responsibility for sex, making it seem that no rational woman ever would want to have sex with the man in the first place.

    Personally, the right to an abortion is important to me for many reasons, and one of those reasons, sure enough, has to do with the fact that I like sex with my dood. Dworkin and Raymond may think that I’m just being duped into sex, but, even having read them, I know what makes me happy. I know what’s important to me.

    It’s one of several reasons I’m voting for Obama, but it’s certainly one of the biggest reasons.

  180. Cathy

    Soopermouse, you took my comment out of context. I was responding to a comment far above about what to say to jerks who say Palin should go back to the kitchen. OK, I went and read some of your blog, and do apologize for presuming you were a Repub hack. I was trying to find out why you support McCain (Vinaigrette Girl got to the point and flat out asked, much better than my beating around the bush). Apparently you think that in four years, we’ll get another chance, and nothing bad will happen during those four years. I must remind you that very soon, several SCOTUS justices will need to be replaced. The chances of the replacements being decent are much higher if Obama is prez, even though he isn’t the best friend of feminists. I must also remind you that McCain will keep us in this war as long as possible. I’m sorry, but there is no way to “take back the Democratic party” by voting McCain. Four more years of the same hell is not my idea of revenge. You’re right that we do have a shitty choice. We are fucked either way because we’re female, and getting fucked is the only reason we’re here, right? IBTFGDP.

  181. delphyne

    No Natalia, I’m not saying any of that – it’s all in your fevered imagination. Fevered imaginations seem to be the order of the day here.

    My point, as it seems to need to be spelled out to you, is that the liberal doods are hypocrites. Try to focus on the men for a change instead of tying yourself up in knots about women. They claim to care so much about abortion and the risk of it being taken from women, but the real truth is that they are using it as a club with which to beat women democrats over the head with and get them back in line.

    Do you think if the right to abortion disappeared one liberal dood would stop fucking his girlfriend? Would he say “No dear, you might get pregnant, I don’t want to put you in that position because I really do care so much about you and your body”?, because I don’t. It didn’t stop the liberal doods in the sixties – abortion was illegal but they still fucked women and pregnancy was something women were left to deal with. They need abortion because there’s not a chance in hell they’d ever actually change their own behaviour and that’s something liberal women need to think about.

    The abortion issue is a club that liberal doods are trying to beat democratic women over the head with to get them back in line. Obama’s people have already said so – calculating that they could make pissed off Hillary voters return to the fold using the threat of losing Roe vs Wade. It’s a red herring, there is already a conservative majority in the Supreme Court who can now overturn Roe vs Wade any time they want to. It’s not gonna happen because both parties want to use the spectre of abortion (either pro or anti) to rally their troops around.

  182. delphyne

    “delphyne, I’ve read that the PUMAs were started by a McCain donor.”

    At the Daily Misogynist, I mean Kos was it, Cathy? snigger

    Get with the programme Cathy, smearing feminists as republicans makes you an anti-feminist. You”ve already tried to do it once to Soopermouse, now you’re trying to do it to a whole tranche of them. PUMA started at The Confluence in June and quickly spread. Hillary even gave them a shout out in her speech at the DNC – “The Sisterhood of the Travelling Pantsuit”

    Read it here, then read the rest of the history. This is women standing up for ourselves, something which seems to be an anathema to a lot of liberal feminists:

    http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2008/01/19/the-sisterhood-of-the-travelling-pantsuit/

  183. soopermouse

    What makes McCain good for me?

    1. He is very unlikely to run again in 4 years.
    2. While he is no feminist, he did not gain his nomination by stepping on better qualified women. Simply put, I will not give a vote to the guy who stole Hillary Clinton’s nomination by way of electoral fraud and backroom maoeuvering. I can’t.
    3. I do not trust Barack Obama. The above things are scaring the shit out of me. I cannot assume that he is going to grow a moral compass once elected. On the contrary, I believe that his actions this year tell without a shadow of a doubt, that he cannot be trusted. At all.Someone who already broke and stretched the law to get the nomination, who went back on pretty much everythign eh campaigned on is not someone I would trust.
    4. A lot of people here have mentioned Sarah Palin’s beliefs. Yet there is no evidence that she would try to impose her religious beliefs upon others, although her anti abortionist view apparently put her into the 7th circle of hell, together with such awful peopel like Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Mary Wollstonecraft. However, it is very obvious to e that Barack Obama is the one whose faith should be more troublesome since he has already stated his intention to blur the separation of church and state. He has made it very clear that he intends to maintain the idiotic and undemocratic funding of FBOs and continue to take the money that should go to state social services in order to fund these FBOs. Much as I am willing to respect everyone’s religioucs beliefs if they are willing to respect mine, dow e really want to put such crucial services for women and other vulnerable categories in the hands of people who are very likely to withhold support from people who do not agree with their professed beliefs? For example, the hospitals and charities ran by the Catholic Church will not perform abortions. Think about that.
    5. A defeat now is very likely to help the pro democratic principles democrats to regain control of their party. Shameful losses do have a tendency to shake incompetent leaderships. I believe that the DNC is corrupt and incapable of leading anything. They have broken rules, shit all over the democratic principles and the very charter of the Democratic party in order to nominate Barack Obama. Hois defeat would be their defeat.
    6. John McCain has stated that his “100 years in Iraq” statement should be interpreted as 100 years of military presence, not of war. There has been an US military presence in Germany and Japan for over half a century, and that wasn’t a war. You see, being a veteran myself, I have a tendency to trust wars with people who have experienced them. I do not trust Barack Obama with the war, especially since he has already stated that he would advise for unauthorized military expeditions in Pakistan if “substantive intelligence” showed that OBL was located there. I should probably not need to explain to anyone that the idea is stupid at best, and incredibly dangerous overall.
    7. Obama wanted to vote to Roberts. he didn’t care that Roberts was anti woman, he had to be stopped by someone on his staff. What does that tell you about his judgement on SCOTUS appointments?
    8. McCain is a short time risk that would allow us to make ammends in 4 years. Obama is a long term risk with unforeseen consequences. You see, even if McCain wanted to go to another war, there aren’t any money for it. Plus, I am not forgetting the reason why the Republicans hate McCain. He is a guy who went against their system and rules for years. He has a better ethics record than OBama. remember 2000? I haven’t forgotten it. Ys, he has significantly changed his positions since, but do we seriously know whether that was a willing change or whether he had to fall in line with Bush’s Republican style?

    Hope that helps

  184. monika

    I think I can see how a vote for McCain/Palin is a choice for many women who feel the Democratic Party betrayed them.

    But I still don’t see how voting for McCain/Palin would be good for women as a whole.

    I suppose it comes down to reform vs revolution. I see reform as getting more women in top positions, regardless of how it impacts women as a whole. So in that way, having a woman VP is reformist positive step.

    A revolutionary step would be to dismantle the system as a whole so that the whole system works for women. And I won’t pretend that a vote for Obama/Biden will do this, because it certainly won’t.

    It sucks when it comes to elections and we have to choose between two (or three) asshats or people we disagree with in general. In cases like that, I have resorted to eatig my ballot or created my own “none of the above” box. While this certainly hasn’t helped getting the “lesser” asshat in power, it felt good to me, so in that way I can empathize with McCain/Palin supporters.

    I can recall only one election I was excited about. It was a municipal election a few years back where a progressive woman was challenging the homophobic mayor who had been in power too long. (He had refused to proclaim “gay Pride” day and was taken to a human rights court and lost).

    It was so exciting to me to finally take part in an election where I truly supported a candidate.

    Not only was the candidate I supported a woman, but she was a woman who had a long history of supporting sexual assualt centres and women’s shelters – she did this long before she tried to get elected, which proved to me that she wasn’t in it for the glory, but because she cared.

    For many blamers, this was Clinton, and I truly empathize with the frustration of finally being excited about someone, only to have them not elected. I could see losing faith in the “system” but I suppose as radical feminists, we don’t have a whole lotta faith in the system to begin with!

  185. Mooska

    Hey soopermouse

    I’d also like to hear why you’d vote for McCain, if you don’t mind telling us.

    I’m a child of the Thatcher years here in the UK and I can tell you that, true to her ‘no such thing as society’ philosophy, she did nothing to advance women’s rights.

    Incidentally, abortion is a huge issue for poor inner-city women in any country. Do you *really* speak for enough people to be able to say “Reproductive choice, which is the cause du jour of white middle class feminists, is a lot less important for feminists from other walks of life.”

    Because even as a poor inner-city woman of colour in America, I suspect you’re better off than this woman.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/oct/08/health.lifeandhealth
    She died of a botched abortion and left her four young children and elderly mother behind. As the article says, “González was not stupid and did not want to die. She knew her chance of surviving the butchery was small. But being a practical woman, she recognised it was her only chance, and took it.”

    I really don’t think you can dismiss reproductive choice as a ’cause du jour’ unless you’re prepared to look the reality of the absence of that choice in the face, and dismiss that too. And I think you would be doing women like María de Jesús González a disservice if you do.

  186. Inverarity

    soopermouse, you are doing some really interesting logical contortions, to conclude that Obama is guilty of unethical, deceitful behavior and holds scary positions, and yet pretend that McCain isn’t far worse on every count.

    Refusing to vote for Obama because you don’t trust him, I can understand. Advocating voting instead for the candidate who is absolutely the worst possible choice, on every issue that matters to feminists, is harder to comprehend. There are other options, like withholding your vote altogether, or voting for a third-party candidate, or writing in Hillary Clinton. That would make the same statement to the Democrats. But instead, you actually want to help elect John McCain?

    As for your assertion that McCain won’t be so bad because he’ll be terrible and we can easily get rid of him in 2012, I can only conclude that you’ve forgotten 2004.

  187. Squiggy

    Help us Twisty!I can’t bear to scroll through another three page drone. Brevity is still the soul of wit- and pith. Let’s leave it to McCain and Palin to bore (drill baby drill!) us to oblivion.

  188. soopermouse

    Here’s the thing Inverarity: I don’t advocate voting FOR McCain. I advocate voting AGAINST Obama. I do not believe that McCain is that devil you make him to be, and maybe that’s my bad. I don’t think all Republicans are monsters. I don’t think all pro lifers are horrible people. Call it maturity, but at some point you learn that not everyone will always agree with you, and that is entirely OK.

    But the best way of voting AGAINST Obama is voting FOR McCain. A vote for McKinney or abstainign from vote means that one other vote can make the loss up. It takes 2 votes for Obama to counterract one for McCain.

    Actually, I don’t think I ever said tht he would be “terrible”. It’s more of an age issue. I dont think the guy who had his doctors guarantee that he won’t die in 4 years is not very likely to run again at age 76, let’s face it.

    And by the way? Why would anyone vote for the guy who pays his female staff less than his male staff? (McCain does the exact opposite btw)

    As for McCain, here’s the thing: I don’t think he is the worst on “every issue that matters” for feminists. There is more to feminism than reproduction, and by one dimensioning your issues you one demension women. ( There is an actual decent discussion of that at Reclusive Leftist). There is more to us than our uteri, and I have no reason to believe McCain will institute Gilead.

    Let’s take off the fucking tinfoil hats. These scenarios are just a bludgeon to force women to vote for Obama, and considering his stances? That is fucking bullshit. The asshole shit on women all the primary, called us names and disrespected us and our candidate, stated through his surrogates that he didn’t want women’s votes ( Donna Brazile told us to stay home, remember?) and now you and those like you are using this fucking bludgeon to force us to get in line. FUCK THAT AND THOSE WHO DO IT. Your aermageddon scenarios are just a fucking instrument to manipulate women to get in line behind the candidate who doesn’t give a flying fuck about us. You can choose to be used and taken for granted, but leave the rest of us fucking out of it. Stop with the apocalypticc scenarios because they don’t impress anyone, and just admit to the simple fact that there are two shitty candidates this year, and get the fuck over it. People who don’t stand up for themselves get walked all over, and this is what happened to women this year. Who in her fucking right mind would seriously expect women to just shut up and take the abuse, and reward it with votes? That’s bullshit, the expectations are sexist and bullshit.

    There is one thing McCain is better on than Obama: representation for women. He is the guy who had the courage to get a woman for VP. Obama didn’t. And he is paying through his nose for it. I want him to pay more. I want that asshole to regret the day he decided to smear Hillary Clinton and steal her nomination.I want the Democrats to never shit on women again. If in the process that gets a woman in anever before achieved position of power, even better, for ALL women.

  189. other orange

    Soopermouse, you’re voting for John “The Terrorists Want Your Babies” McCain and I’m the one who’s using the politics of fear ? He wants to build a damn border fence ! He wants to speed accused terrorists through military tribunals instead of open courts ! He’s probably wearing a shirt right now that says “I HEART THE POLITICS OF FEAR.”

    I understand your problems with Obama. But I think you have much bigger problems to worry about.

  190. Mooska

    “Call it maturity, but at some point you learn that not everyone will always agree with you, and that is entirely OK.”

    “now you and those like you are using this fucking bludgeon to force us to get in line. FUCK THAT AND THOSE WHO DO IT. Your aermageddon scenarios are just a fucking instrument to manipulate women to get in line behind the candidate who doesn’t give a flying fuck about us. You can choose to be used and taken for granted, but leave the rest of us fucking out of it.”

    Hmm.

  191. delphyne

    There doesn’t seem to be too much difference between the candidates’ stances on immigration. They both voted for the border fence (as did Hillary):

    http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/campaign-2008/2008/03/17/where-clinton-obama-and-mccain-stand-on-immigration.html

    Soopermouse, Inverarity is a liberal dood which is why he feels emboldened to tell feminists that McCain is the worst possible choice for us. Like he’d know.

  192. Cathy

    Soopermouse, can you please give a specific example of how Obama broke the law to get the nomination? I was under the impression that he was handed the nomination by a bunch of assholes who realize that racism is a no-no, but figure that sexism is still cool. The media treated HRC like shit, and his people didn’t jump out to defend her. But how exactly did he break the law and steal it from her?

    I will echo the point that so many make here, that voting McCain is cutting off your nose to spite your face. I was insulted that David suggested that any feminists were stupid enough to do this, but maybe he was partly right. They’ll probably blame feminists if McCain wins, even if he wins by disenfranchising the poor, African-American, and Latino voters plus rigging electronic voting machines.

    McCain is a short time risk that would allow us to make ammends in 4 years.

    I repeat, SCOTUS appointments. You can’t make amends once he appoints them. Think, soopermouse!

    Your point on your blog, about Palin being a female role model for girls is interesting. But what if Buttercup is right, and they swap her out for some less interesting male fundie? Maybe not before the debate – maybe after the election. The GOP is not above this. “Weapon of Mass Distraction” to grab the limelight from Obama is right. They used her, just as men always use women. It’s hard to imagine those sexist Republicans allowing any woman, however reactionary, “a heartbeat away from the presidency.”

    Monika, I’m ready for the revolution. How do we dismantle this system, so carefully designed to maintain the current power structure?

  193. Hattie

    AAACK!

  194. delagar

    Soopermouse, you don’t think Palin would impose her worldview on us all? You’re reading about a different woman than I have been. To choose just one example, she ran as mayor of Wasilla under the slogan that the town would “finally” have a Christian mayor: you don’t think that sounds like someone who wants to impose her ethics on us all?

    That bit during the Gibson interview about reforming the nation had zip to do with ecomics and everything to do with abortion and teaching evolution. Go over to Fred’s blog, Slacktivist, for more on this issue.

    You need to speak Pentecostal. If you do, believe me, you would not be confused about what she wants or what she’d doing.

  195. soopermouse

    Cathy, there is endless evidence of caucus fraud. People who are better than me at this have dioccumented instances of voter intimidation, bulletin theft and so on. There is endless evidence of delegate intimidation. The deal on May 31st? That was against the democratic charter that states that all meetings should be open. being awarded delegates that were “uncomitted” in Michigan? That is illegal since in Michigan “uncomitted” is a valid candidate. being awarded 4 of Hilalry’s delegates? even moreso.

    Why do you think there was no actual roll call at the convention? Because with Mi and Fl restored at full strength, the difference between Obama and Hillary was 60 something delegates. Take away the 55 uncomitted from Michigan, and 4 he stole from Hillary… what will remain?

    I am aware of SCOTUS appointments. However, do you seriously trust Obama to make woman friendly SCOTUS appointments? Has Obama ever done anything for women? Has he doen one fuckign thing for women this year? One sign of at least respect if not support? His NARAL score is based on “present” votes. Not “yes” just “present” So what reasons do you have to believe his SCOTUS appointments will be good for us? He doesn’t need nor want women voters.

    Why would Republicans swap Palin out? She’s a fucking success. Only stupid people replace things that work brilliantly, and the republicans aren’t stupid.

    Think about this for a second: if Obama didn’t have the label “D” on him, would you vote for him or defend him? Because that’s all you are telling me.

    And do you knwo what? That’s wrong. For decades Democrats have put forward one shitty candidate after another, and people grumbled and voted for them. Nobody ever said “wait a fucking second” and the result is a Dem party that’s only a microne left of the Rep party. This is what falling in line brings you- or as we say wherr I am from, “the baby who doesn’t cry doesn’t get fed”. The Dems are taking advanatge of women and will continue to do so until they are forced to stop. Voting for them will not stop them. It’s an abusive relationship and will continue to be one until women decide to stop enabling their abuser.

  196. Natalia

    My imagination isn’t fevered, but it is certainly stirred. Because, although I agree with you about hypocrisy, I am still seeing you frame sex as something that ONLY the doods would want. Female desire FOR the doods isn’t in the equation.

    They need abortion because there’s not a chance in hell they’d ever actually change their own behaviour and that’s something liberal women need to think about.

    I mean, don’t you think that WOMEN “need abortion” as well – if they so choose it? Abortion DOES benefit men AS WELL as women, and it should. Though I would argue that abortion benefits women MORE.

    As far as I’m concerned it’s a sacred right (and I fully agree with that old bumper sticker that said: “If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament”).

  197. Natalia

    Sorry, I meant to say more, but somehow ended up pressing the “blame” button without thinking:

    I think that not getting any, IF abortion rights are taken away from us, is something that would harm both (heterosexual) men and women. I don’t think about my dood not having sex with me out of the goodness of his heart – because I’m going to want to have sex with him either way. It would SUCK (no pun intended, hur hur) if we had to worry about a potential baby, for BOTH of us. For me more, obviously. That ought to go without saying.

    I hope that explains my position.

  198. Spiders

    “2. While he is no feminist, he did not gain his nomination by stepping on better qualified women.”

    He probably stepped on better qualified women his whole life to get where he is.

  199. Squiggy

    Soopermouse you’re boring us. You’re as mixed up as McPain-and as desperate. I urge all you good women to lusciously ignore her/him/the organization they represent. (badly)

  200. Spiders

    Some of their arguments make sense to me, and I appreciate the different perspectives.

    I’d like to put a question to the people who are planning to vote Republican.
    Would you definitely vote Democrat had Clinton got the nomination?

  201. scary

    She is a female Hitler nazi who belongs to the Jerry Springer Club of action in the lies and deception categories — bridge to nowhere is where she needs to be. Anyone with the nickname “Barracuda” tells she doesn’t play by the rules. She’s agressive like a pitbull and a barracuda, and she’s no lady. She developed a dysfunctional family, with a daughter who chose to ignore her mother’s birth control plan called abstinence. Whoops! Too late. Maybe next daughter will take the heed. Only time will tell.

    I’m voting for Obama. He has a nice family. I like them because they represent my value system, not Palin because she is, well, she is more of a “Jerry Springer” type of person who has no class, and a very dysfunctional person who only dysfunctional people can identify with.

    Obama and Biden are family people who value their families and truly love their families and don’t use them for political gain and political pawns. Obama/Biden are good people who use good judgment, where McCain and Palin don’t seem to be concerned for bad judgment in their past. McCain may have been a POW, but actually he had a failed mission, and didn’t complete his mission because he was a “maverick” that made him make a bad decision, and use poor judgment. If he had followed his mission as he should have, he would have been more of a war hero, not a POW martyr.

    Obama and Biden will make clear and concise judgment calls. They won’t make “maverick” bad decisions that would put us in harms way. They won’t let us be held hostage of others who want to hurt us. Vote Obama and Biden 2008.

  202. kate

    Hope all is well for Twist and all other residents of Texas, my heart goes out to you.

    My sister-in-law is struggling with breast cancer, I guess the worst kind. Heard today that she plans to get everything that could ever get this disease removed — the uterus, the ovaries and her breasts. I will be visiting her soon. Anyone with suggestions on how I can best deal with this as a good supporter please tell me, because I’m clueless and frankly, I really don’t know her real well as my brother and I just made peace after years and years of silence, only last year.

    Anyway, found this piece written about this woman’s views on Palin which I think are right there with what I’m thinking. Its from “Black Commentator” which I get by email, a good read for a different more liberal take on politics. Read this, read other things in the mag as well if you like, but by all means read this:

    /www.blackcommentator.com/291/291_ror_lipstick_on_pig.html

    I don’t know how to make a link, so just do the cut and paste thing please.

  203. Kali

    I mean, don’t you think that WOMEN need abortion as well – if they so choose it? Abortion DOES benefit men AS WELL as women, and it should.

    The point is that liberal men are using “abortion rights” as a stick to control women with, even though these rights benefit men as well as women. They pretend that they are pro-woman because they are for abortion rights, though the primary (and I suspect, the only) reason they are for abortion rights is for their own selfish interests. In many ways liberal men are very much anti-women. When it comes to defending the sexual exploitation of women/girls in pornstitution, and defending rapists, liberal men (in my experience and observation) are the worst offenders. Basically, the men on the right believe that it is best for women to stay home being baby-breeders and the men on the left believe it is best for women to be sex-objects spreading their legs.

    The Obamabots represent the worst of the latter. They truly, completely disgust me. Not even the repugs disgust me as much as the sleazy slimeballs that the men on the left have shown themselves to be.

  204. Vinaigrette Girl

    A last note to Soopermouse, at alia

    How interesting that so much of the commenting above is ad hominem but unrelated to international affairs.

    From an international POV I think McCain and Palin have traits of character and intellect which will tend to inflame hostilities, and harden extremist attitudes towards the West. Their internationl politics, such as they are, are old, old, old. In the hardline Islamic countries, in areas of contention (Nigeria, the Sudan, Kenya, malaysia, Indonesia, Pakistan) and in Great Britain and other continental countries with a vocal extremist minority this will have deeply negative effects on women. This is already happening and electing Mccain will make this worse whereas electing Obama has a real chance of de-escalating, to some extent, anti-Western hostilities.

    I say this because with all Obama’s faults he is an intellect and a scholar with a thorough knowledge of US law and comparative law. He will have more respect from other world leaders, and provoke more curiosity and interest, than would McCain: McCain is business-as-usual, and will not in any way challenge anyone out of their entrenched positions, whatever they may be.

    (For the record, yes, I think some of the basic Western values are worth saving although they aren’t the only ones to have great value; but they are essential.)

    I’m not sure which ‘liberal men’ are essentially anti-woman (or moreso than other men) unless they are in the blogosphere; most of the liberal men I knew in the States, grew up with, or know now in the ex-pat community don’t fit that description. Most see women and men as human beings and work hard at overcoming their privileges.

    I don’t vote for negative reasons (“I hate X so will vote Y no matter what Y stands for”) and I think that’s a poor starting place for an adult discussion of the issues at hand; anger (wrote one of my favourite writers, Margery Allingham) is the opium of the brain. It inevitably clouds judgement (even if it informs it to some extent).

    I am also struck by the sheer amount of uncritical reporting of allegations of various kinds of fraud. Accusations of cheating tend to be raised in heated debates and heat doesn’t ensure truthfulness.
    Saying “I know people who went and have seen X” belies the inherent nature of personal evidence, which is that it is biased and always incomplete; hence the need for supporting evidence in jury trials where eye witnesses will still report different versions of events.

    Soopermouse, you are angry about a lot of things; but why you think that’s a good justification for voting FOR McCain as a weapon against Obama doesn’t cut it. McCain might not run again in four years, but the damage a McCain administration would inflict on the rest of the world in the meantime, utside the US, would be terrible for us all.

    I’m not fear-mongering particularly; I just live with the consequences of poor US policy decisions on a daily basis. McCain won’t change what needs to change for me and my family or anyone else’s family to be safe on the streets, babe. You have no idea how picayune, how limited, how sadly narrow, your views and your language come across as, from over here.

    You’re uptight about anger and rumours from caucuses; I’m uptight that the CIA messed up a Britsh intelligence effort to jail yet another gang of anti-women terrorists. I’m uptight that Amercian foreign policy ensures that female British citizens who happen to be Muslim are under increased pressure to conform to a life of slavery to show that they are “good Muslims” and not corrupted by the West as erpresented by my home country.

    Mccain and Palin will do nothing to change that. Nothing. None of your reasons for supporting McCain matter a damn in the face of what I see before me every day.

    There’s me getting angry, now; but leaving out international considerations from the overall discussion makes me very cross because it’s so unrealistic and so SILLY.

    I’ll get my coat now.

  205. Lar

    “Basically, the men on the right believe that it is best for women to stay home being baby-breeders and the men on the left believe it is best for women to be sex-objects spreading their legs.”

    I think most men on both sides have a “Madonna-whore” complex (meaning they all see women as either a “pure” stay at home baby-breeder *or* a “dirty” sex object).

    This isn’t a political argument, I just don’t trust anything with a penis.

    IBTP

  206. delphyne

    “I mean, don’t you think that WOMEN “need abortion” as well – if they so choose it? Abortion DOES benefit men AS WELL as women, and it should. Though I would argue that abortion benefits women MORE.”

    Natalia, of course I think women need abortion. That isn’t my point here. Are you able to hold two thoughts in your head at the same time – that women need abortion and also that liberal men are sexist hypocrites trying to hold Roe vs Wade over the heads (wombs?) of women who are finding it extremely difficult to bring themselves to vote for a public (he used misogyny to win his primary race) misogynist like Obama? I’m sorry to be rude but are you being purposefully obtuse? Why do you keep trying to avoid what I’m actually saying? Is it too painful to realise the selfishness of liberal men and their extreme pursuit of their own self-interest? No wonder Obama is so popular amongst liberal doods – they can recognise a fellow woman-hater a mile off.

    “As far as I’m concerned it’s a sacred right (and I fully agree with that old bumper sticker that said: “If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament”).”

    It was Gloria Steinem who said it and I’m going to repeat what I saw someone say elsewhere in response – if men could get pregnant women wouldn’t exist.

  207. tinfoil hattie

    Let’s take off the fucking tinfoil hats.

    HEY! I resent that!

    Delphyne, Kali: Word. Soopermouse, word also.

    I don’t actually care if anyone here thinks I’m crazy, a troll, or a Republican shill for my views. I think many people are missing what Delphyne and soopermouse are essentially saying: Never forget how much men hate you. Barack Obama does not care about women. John McCain does not care about women. Sarah Palin, like all of us, is a tool of the patriarchy. She seems to me to be a woman who has benefited tremendously from feminism while holding the “I’m no FEMINIST, or anything!” attitude. She’s got oodles of white privilege and middle class privilege.

    And she should, MUST, be defended from SEXIST attacks. Even if she eats kitten for breakfast.

    Democratic men hate us. Republican men hate us. Lukewarm non-rejection of women’s “rights” (why is “women’s rights” even a phrase?) is not the same as support for women.

    Sigh, sigh, sigh.

    There isn’t a good choice for women this election, except perhaps Cynthia McKinney. At least the Green Platform talks about women as though we were actually half the population, or something.

    The Democratic party only hating is “50%” isn’t good enough for me. If we women sit back and say, “Yes, you abusers, we know you’re shitty to us and don’t give a damn about us but you’re all we’ve got,” they will never, EVER have to listen to women.

    I don’t believe they will anyway.

  208. Nakedthougths

    Palin is a threat. A big one. Her personal beliefs are nearly irrelevant unless McCain kicks the bucket. So any Pro contraception, pro feminist ideals are only there to secure a vote. She will be swept away when she is no longer needed just like any other woman.

    She is de-stigmatising the word feminism, but also making it into something much more conservative than I am comfortable with.

    Obama may not be pro woman but neither is mccain. This is a ruse.

    I want a 3rd option. from what I’ve heard (and I’m in NZ at the moment so not paying as much attention as I could be)

    Republicans are for tax cuts for the rich.

    Democrats are for tax cuts for the middle class.

    Isn’t there a group that needs assistance that’s being left out here?

  209. BigFish

    Indeed, I’ve gotten more forwarded hate emails directed at Palin than anyone else in the campaign.

    Wow, women have even forwarded sexist photoshopped pictures of Palin, and NEVER ever in my life have I ever seen a VP candidate EVER depicted with such disrespect. It was only women who seemed to freak out this much, and heap this much abuse on Gov. Palin.

    If this is how feminists treat women, we are in real trouble folks. Especially since I don’t really see her as other than a small town woman made good in the world. The more the abuse gets heaped on her by women, the more I actually almost want to vote for her. Women should be honoring the breakthrough this is. I think maybe these kinds of attacks on women make other young women think of feminism as pathological.

  210. soopermouse

    Actually tinfoil hattie, Sarah Palin considers herself a feminist and is not afraid to say it. Dr Violet Socks has made a terrific analysis of this phenomenon and I can’t possibly say it better than she did.

    I think what a lot of people fail to understand is that many of us invested a lot in the democratic party. These people were supposed to be our brothers and our family. It hurts a lot more when your family betray you than when the strangers do so.

    The democrats rejected not only Hillary in the primaries. They rejected women. Hillary was not attacked and smeared and villified because she was a politician. Those attacks were against the woman, because she had the audacity to run and win a primary. And she fucking did. She won the popular viote, and should the DNC not have played their backroom deals and tolerance of caucus fraud, she would have won the primary as well, as certain as Gore would have won the white house in 2000.
    Not only that, but her campaign and victory were completely erased at the convention- the democrats would not even have the decency to give her a floor roll call like any other (male) candidates had in the past. That mockery sealed it for me. These people wanted to completely erase the victory of the first women in history to win a primary.

    Giving a vote to them is equivalent to saying that what they did was OK. It’s an endorsement of their betrayal and misoginy.

    I can understand your support of the Green Party tinfoil hattie. However, I am somewhat weary of them, for one reason: Nader.

    For those who keep saying that voting for McCain is not the way to take back the democratic party: until you come with a better solution, you don’t get to say that. Compliance and support have been tried before and they don’t work.

    For those crying about the apocalypse that a McCain administration would wreak upon the world: be serious. The world took 8 years of Bush andsurvived. However, think about the long term consequences of an America wheer both parties are republican. Those are a lot worse than 4 years of a McCain administration.

  211. Rhus

    I am too astonished by this thread to write anything coherent now. The last thing I needed to read today was “The world took 8 years of Bush and survived” in Twisty’s site.

    Thank you for your very articulate comments, Vinaigrette Girl. I’m writing from Spain. I totally hear you.

  212. speedbudget

    Kate–

    I’m so sorry to hear about your sister-in-law, and my brother and sister and I are starting to try to talk after years and years of silence, so I understand where you are coming from.

    Really, the only thing you NEED to do is just be there. Let her know you support her and are there for her, and let her take the lead. If she wants to talk about it, talk about it. If not, do some other stuff. I mean, when my cousin was having a major cyst removed from her ovary that might have been cancerous, that was pretty much all she wanted to do, talk about it a little bit, then go on with whatever we were going to do together. So really, the best support you can give is just to be there and be open and ready to listen.

  213. tinfoil hattie

    Sarah Palin considers herself a feminist and is not afraid to say it.

    Well, then Sarah Palin and I disagree on that point. Big surprise.

    But the election? As with everything else in life, it’s all about the p.

    As for Nader, he’s running independent this year, so I’m not sure what his affiliation is with the Green Party anymore. I’m also not willing to toss the entire ideology because of one guy.

    Just like I’m not willing to support the Democratic ideology (as it stands today) because of one guy.

    An Obama presidency will change virtually nothing for women. Rubber-stamping VAWA has prevented how many women from being killed by their “husbands” or “lovers”? Roe’s already been decimated and with the power being sent back to the states, is little but a formality. Remember who didn’t filibuster the Catholic male justices? Democrats.

    I don’t know what a McCain presidency will do to hurt women any further. Everyone’s so sure he’ll die and that evil evil Sarah Palin will become president. We know no such thing.

    I’m cynical, bitter, suffering from outrage fatigue, and I have absolutely no faith in our political process or in the U.S. government. The government isn’t going to protect us, or save us, or do anything to help us. It’s too busy shoring up the economy by bailing out the assholes (white men) who got us here in the first place. Meanwhile, the rest of us will continue to try and pay the mortgage, pay the outrageous health insurance premiums or ignore our symptoms of illness because we HAVE no insurance, put food on the table, and pay for transportation to get to a job. If we still have a job.

  214. soopermouse

    Hattie:
    http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/2008/09/15/sarah-palin-and-feminism/

    Dr Socks is far more articulate than I am.

  215. Vera

    My response to the devastation of the Democratic primary was to re-register Green. I feel like in their haste to eliminate Clinton, the Democratic Party leadership burned a path right across my back. Or maybe it was a bridge they burned.

    Watching the leadership of the Republican Party condemn the sexist attacks against Palin was a surreal experience. I realize that they are a bunch of shameless hypocrites, but they made the very statements I had waited, in vain, for the Democratic leadership to make when Hillary Clinton was under attack.

    Back in May I took a few minutes to actually read the Green Party’s platform, and realized that I must change parties. Here’s the introduction to the section of the Green Party platform that concerns the rights of women:

    Women’s Rights
    Since the beginning of what we call civilization, when men’s dominance over women was firmly established until the present day, our history has been marred with oppression of and brutality to women. The Green Party deplores this system of male domination, known as patriarchy, in all its forms, both subtle and overt – from oppression, inequality, and discrimination to domestic violence, rape, trafficking and forced slavery. The change the world is crying for cannot occur unless women’s voices are heard. Democracy cannot work without equality for women that provides equal participation and representation. It took an extraordinary and ongoing fight over 72 years for Women to win the right to vote. However, the Equal Rights Amendment has still not been ratified.

    We believe that equality should be a given, and that all Greens must work toward that end. We are committed to increasing participation of women in politics, government and leadership so they can change laws, make decisions, and create policy solutions that affect and will improve women’s lives, and we are building our party so that Greens can be elected to office to do this. In July 2002 the Women’s Caucus of the Green Party of the United States was founded to carry out the Party’s commitment to women.

    I urge people to read the whole thing:
    h ttp://www.gp.org/platform/2004/socjustice.html

  216. Vinaigrette Girl

    Rhus, thank you. [waves]

    Soopermouse, if you meant me in the “crying about apocalypse” phrase: I’m not. I made a reasoned set of critiques from a feminist viewpoint on anyone’s non-international analysis of the presidential race.

    Some people – men, mostly – say that women shouldn’t be in high office because they let their emotions over-ride their logical faculties, and that this leads to the misinterpretation of data and their context. If you think I am talking about an apocalypse, based on what I wrote, then you have misinterpreted me quite grossly.

    But I note you have not dealt with anything I’ve written in a substantive manner. That’s quite disappointing, in a way, because it could make you vulnerable to all sorts of stereotyping, starting with “women are so hysterical, and they never read anything thoroughly because their emotions take over from their brains, but that is what makes them so special, bless them” and going on to “women have very limited perspectives and can’t handle international politics because they care so much more about what goes on closer to home”.

    Which bring us back to Sarah Palin. ;->

  217. Jezebella

    I can’t believe I’m saying this, but here goes: there’s more to this election than what is good for women specifically. As the world goes, women go, and pragmatically speaking, there’s really no point in voting for a third party candidate. If you ask me, it’s just pissing in the wind.

    tinfoil hattie said:
    “An Obama presidency will change virtually nothing for women.”

    and

    “I don’t know what a McCain presidency will do to hurt women any further.”

    Here’s the thing: it’s gonna be one or the other. If it’s a wash on women’s issues, then consider the economy, international affairs, the environment, de-regulation of business, education, infrastructure, and the military when deciding which way to vote. Because ALL of those issues affect women, not just the laws on domestic violence, reproductive rights, and equality in the workplace. Do you want to live McCain’s world or Obama’s world? There is no third choice if you stay in the U.S. There is plenty a McCain presidency can do to hurt women further; just look at how the shite economy disproportionately affects women.

  218. narya

    Gloria Steinem did NOT come up with, “If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.” She cites (e.g., in the intro to her collection of her essays) that organizer Flo Kennedy (NOT Rose Kennedy, as I’ve seen elsewhere), possibly w/ Steinem, heard this from a female cabbie in Boston back in the day.

    The rest of this discussion, or most of it, has contained more heat than light, as they say, and I’m gonna stay out of it.

  219. Akubalady

    I am a long time lurker at IBTP. Love this site, admire and envy the intelligence, eloquence and humor of the people who regularly post here. Both my adult daughters have become hooked too.

    I feel I have to break my silence to comment about Palin. I have strong feelings about her. I think she is an aggressive and crooked politician who is less than truthful, thinks she is above the law and is really incompetent in financial matters.

    But is Palin a feminist? Feminists can be crooks and liars too. However, my logic and instincts both tell me she is not a feminist. I have read the links posted on this thread to get a better understanding of all the arguments for and against her feminist ‘qualifications’. However, even with all Palin’s feminist-like attributes I have a hard time thinking that anyone who is as devout a christian as she claims to be could ever be a feminist. Her evangelical-end-timer-fundamentalist-christianist religion is clear when it comes women’s place in society and whether women are humans beings equal to men. That place, as we all know, is below and subservient to men.

  220. soopermouse

    VG: I have addressed your assumptions, because that is all you have. Assumptiosn and wishful thinking with nothing solid to base them on. And a serious dose of sexism disguised as concern trolling. You can shove it.
    You have not presented anything substantive, because all your support of Obama is based on rationalization and wishful thinking. You assume and project onto him whatever you want to see, and in the process you have to ignore and rationalize everything that disagrees with your narrative. I am not paid well enough to deal repeatedly with your delusions. I recommend you find someone who can read my post to you again and translate it, because it is extremely obvious that you will only see what agrees with you and nothing else, which makes the discussion moot.

    As far as the economy goes, I present those who don’t live in the “Obama is good at everything because he’s been to Harvard” land the following evidence:

    “Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama said on Friday he supported efforts by the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve to shore up confidence in the financial markets and said he would hold off from presenting his own economic recovery plan.”

    vs

    “Thursday, Republican nominee Sen. John McCain sought a broad expansion of government regulation over financial institutions, including the formation of a body to both assume distressed mortgages and help failing investment banks.

    Saying the government cannot “wait until the system fails,” Sen. McCain called for the creation of an entity that would essentially help companies sell off bad loans and other impaired assets. It is unclear how the body, dubbed the Mortgage and Financial Institutions trust, would operate, including whether or not institutions would seek help or whether the government would intervene on its own behalf.”

    So yeah, economy.

  221. DaisyDeadhead

    This thread is fascinating! (At least Palin will be nice and tan when she takes office!)

    And… what Natalia said. McCain is proud of his beliefs: Abortion exceptions ONLY for rape and incest, people… and Palin doesn’t believe in even THOSE exceptions.

    Supreme court justices ARE going to retire, you know.

    I can’t believe anyone seriously consider voting for McCain, unless they just don’t care about women.

  222. tinfoil hattie

    Jez, it’s not a “wash” on women’s concerns for me. All of the things you listed are things upon which I have based my vote for the past 30 years. We have never “gotten to” women’s issues. If I keep voting for men on the issues you listed above, we never will “get to” the womenfolk.

    I refuse to vote for someone who refuses to hear what women have to say. Vera expressed my thoughts pretty much exactly.

    And soopermouse, I read Violet Socks quite regularly, and I agree with her points about sexism and how Palin is being dissected and held to a standard to which Republican men are not held. However, I’ve never heard a male Republican candidate say he’s a feminist. I was surprised to find out that Palin calls herself a feminist, because I disagree that she is one. And her feminist credentials can be held up to scrutiny if she claims the title.

    That said, the sexist and gender-based attacks on her MUST stop. It IS surreal to see the Republicans doing what I waited in vain for months — no, years — for the Democrats to do. It’s pathetic, in fact.

  223. soopermouse

    Hattie: I agree with Violet about the fact that, except for her pro life stance, Palin does appear to be spot on for everything else that defines a feminist. As I have said it above, if being pro choice is a sine qua non condition for being a feminist, then even Susan B Anthony doesn’t qualify. Which, you know, bullshit, but YMMV ( your mileage may vary)

    Palin has expresed and showed repeatedly that:
    1. she does not oppose contraception and wants it taught in school, alongside with abstinence- which Annabelle(http://annabellep.wordpress.com/2008/09/16/why-i-agree-with-sarah-palin-on-abstinence-education/) agrees with, and so do many of us
    2. She has repeatedly stated that while her beliefs are her own, she will follow the law of the land. She has not at any point tried to impose her beliefs upon her state, thus I think there is a fairly good chance she might not want to impose it upon the country either.

    and since we go back into circles, I made a post some way up on this and I won’t repeat myself.

  224. soopermouse

    for those who feel the urge to smear Palin, please go here http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/2008/09/19/when-misogny-masquerades-as-feminism/ . I am tired of repeatind myself.

  225. Natalia

    I’m sorry to be rude but are you being purposefully obtuse? Why do you keep trying to avoid what I’m actually saying?

    I’m trying to refraing from that, Delphyne, but I guess for me it comes down to framing the issue as a problem of liberal men’s selfishness. As you recall, I specifically told you that I agree with you on the hypocrisy, of some – what I objected to was the whole issue of heterosexual sex, and you wondering whether or not men would abstain from it if abortion rights are trampled. Because I saw that as an incomplete question, rhetorical though it was.

    Of course, I’m biased, I LIKE Obama. So you can take my words with a grain of salt.

    Also, and this is just a general observation,

    We should not forget about Michelle Obama in all of this. I mean, if you want to talk about attacking a certain woman…

  226. Spiders

    “As the world goes, women go, and pragmatically speaking, there’s really no point in voting for a third party candidate. If you ask me, it’s just pissing in the wind.”

    Minor parties grow when people vote for them, though. Our Green party have been steadily chipping away at the the two major parties for a few years now.
    Once people told me I was crazy to vote Green. Now the Greens are an actual political force.

  227. jami

    “How furious she must be, now that she’s been taken at her word.”

    Why oh why have I not read “Handmaid’s Tale” when I have read “Catcher in the Rye”? IBTP. And my weird problem reading books that have movies.

    Sarah Palin (much like her mirror Ann Coulter) are both against women’s freedom to participate in the world as full humans when there are wealthy white male offspring to consider. As such, Palin and Coulter should each take positions as underpaid nannies in corporate Republican households.

    Like Ann Coulter, though, talking about Palin gives her the attention she craves. Once you’re sure you’re in the company of similarly disgusted types, the best course is silence. We’re poking something smelly and dead (Republican ideology — I’ll spell that out since Republicans clearly don’t understand metaphors) with a stick here.

  228. soopermouse

    Jami
    do you have anything else but smears to share? Because they don’t have room in any progressive political discourse. Your comparison is incredibly off base and you have nothing to base it on but your own sexism and prejudice. I note also that you are a declared Obama supporter, which means that your bias can be seen from orbit. I also found the link to the blog “I could kill her” extremely revealing of your own views and inclinations. Such interesting sexist bullshit and stereotyping there that I’m not surprised at what you are saying here.

    The only thing smelly and dead here it’s you. Take your smears somewhere and leave this as a feminist and therefore Obamazoid free space. You can always go to RCP and cry over the polls showing your idol is losing.

  229. saltyC

    I have to say, though I have had run-ins with Soopermouse, that she is making some good points here, and has maintained good composure in spite of something of a pile-on, questions of her gender, smears as hysterical, etc.

    You made me think, Soopermouse, thank you.

    Also I want to add, that when we say “you call yourself a feminist?? You can believe anything you want but don’t call yourself a feminist” That’s the reason many young women don’t call themselves feminists: they’re not sure what the consensus is on it and don’t wish to be “held up to scrutiny” to see if they are being hypocrites. That’s the reason I didn’t when I was young: I didn’t feel educated enough on it to legitimately call myself one.

  230. Natalia

    As you recall, I specifically told you that I agree with you on the hypocrisy, of some – what I objected to was the whole issue of heterosexual sex, and you wondering whether or not men would abstain from it if abortion rights are trampled. Because I saw that as an incomplete question, rhetorical though it was.

    On second thought, what bothers me isn’t the question about abstinence, to be perfectly clear, but the idea that it’s all about heterosexual men wanting to fuck women. Because women aren’t just passive receptacles in all of this (I’m saying that you necessarily meant to imply that, Delphyne, but your words made me think about that) – heterosexual women want to fuck men. Would we fault them for wanting this, regardless of whether or not abortion is legal?

    But I do understand your point about entitlement, Delphyne – I’m not under the impression that all men who want to keep abortion legal are these altruistic angels whose holy asses we should line up to kiss.

    What I’m fond of is the idea of utilizing alliances, with men as well as women.

  231. Natalia

    ARGH.

    “I’m NOT saying that you necessarily meant to imply that, Delphyne.”

    This is where insomnia and a raging cold gets you.

  232. saltyC

    why would we fault women when it’s their bodies that are being put at risk?

  233. Natalia

    why would we fault women when it’s their bodies that are being put at risk?

    That depends on how you frame the question, doesn’t it? “Being put at risk” is one thing, but a woman who wants to have sex, what is she DOING? Talking about this in terms of what is being DONE to her is, while necessary, doesn’t capture the whole picture does it?

    Would we say, “she’s putting her body at risk” if she WANTS it? We could, I suppose, but do we say it with disdain or anything of the sort?

    Is this any different from a guy who wants it?

    Certainly the consequences for a woman are more severe, but don’t you see some weirdness in blaming a man for something that a woman wants as well?

    To be honest, I find it insulting when we talk about these things as if women don’t participate in them at all, as if they’re totally passive.

    And that’s not to say that Delphyne had no right to say what she said – it just opens up a huge can of worms from where I stand, because no matter what, outside of a lab – it takes two people to make a pregnancy occur, and if we ignore the women in this, then what are they?

  234. delphyne

    For goodness sake Natalia, women are never ignored in this. Has one liberal dood ever had it put to him that as well as supporting abortion he might consider stopping fucking women if we ever lose our right to control our bodies in that way? Could he ever grasp that concept? Because I don’t think he could. You’re a woman and you see the wider picture and you don’t even appear to be able to.

    On one blog in one tiny part of the blogosphere, I mentioned that maybe men might start thinking about their own responsibilities outwith their sexual entitlement and you’ve come down on me like a ton of bricks creating fantasy arguments that I never made in order that you can knock them down and prove what exactly. That liberal feminism continues to stand for never ever criticising men? Can’t you try something different just for once?

    Face it, liberal men don’t give a shit about women. The abortion issue, as had been said at length here, is a means to get women into line. If left-wing women are stupid enough to fall for that because they are so overcome with their hatred and malice towards Palin that it blinds them to the misogyny of Obama then part of me thinks more fool them.

  235. Natalia

    Hey, Delphyne, now you’re talking. “Stupid” is a generalization, but at least it’s an honest one. I personally get tired when people tell me, “no, I don’t think those women are stupid, they’re just victims.”

    What do you call women who are voting for McCain, or any other candidate for that matter?

    Has one liberal dood ever had it put to him that as well as supporting abortion he might consider stopping fucking women if we ever lose our right to control our bodies in that way? Could he ever grasp that concept? Because I don’t think he could.

    You don’t AT ALL see how “he might consider stopping fucking women” as insulting? To both you and me, as women?

    I mentioned that maybe men might start thinking about their own responsibilities outwith their sexual entitlement.

    I’m going to try to be as clear as I can on this: my problem with that question ISN’T that entitlement shouldn’t be questioned. But that it assumes that (heterosexual!) women do not desire men, making men active and women passive. We can’t question the men on this without questioning the women.

  236. jezebella

    wow, soopermouse just tried to kick someone off of this blog. Now, how the fuck does THAT work? Also, calling people Obamazoids and Obamabots doesn’t do much for one’s credibility.

  237. soopermouse

    Jesebella
    I can’t kick anyone off a blog that isn’t mine. I can however defend a feminist space even in the absence of its proprietor. I can also call people on their bullshit, and I don’t think there is anything wrong with it. I recommend you go ahve a look at Jami’s log and blogroll. It’s rather interesting.

  238. Lar

    Is it just me or has this thread gone off on a tangent? (More like all out flame fest, but I digress).

    “Let’s have the blametariat’s views on collaborateuse Sarah Palin, her bridge, and her possible effects on the future of feminism.”

    That was the original question.

    We could sit here all day and argue about which male candidate sucks the most. I mean, we’re all reading a blog titled “I Blame the Patriarchy” for a reason – we blame the patriarchy. The government is one of the biggest representations of patriarchy. Obviously any candidates that make it this far are patriarchy approved, and therefore do not have our best interests in mind. Arguing that either of them genuinely care about women seems like kind of a moot point.

    Everybody is entitled to having and sharing their own opinion, that’s the point of democracy after all. But I’d also like to hear what people have to say about the original question.

  239. tinfoil hattie

    Lar, I think most people here have been talking about Sarah Palin and what her candidacy means in terms of feminism.

  240. Lar

    That’s strange. Look at the last few posts as an example. You don’t see the name “Palin” once, but you see McCain and Obama quite a lot. The only time you see the word “feminism” or “feminist” is when blamers are claming others aren’t really feminists.

    I think some people are still on the same topic, but the rest seems to have degenerated into name calling and arguing in circles about Obama and McCain.

    I respect the opinions of a lot of people on here, so when I heard Palin was nominated I was looking forward to hearing what they thought. I suppose I’m just disappointed with the direction it’s taken.

  241. rubysecret

    Thanks. Back on topic.
    Palin can call herself a feminist, or a maverick, or a hot air balloon pilot, or an ostrich, it doesn’t mean she is one. What matters most – and this applies to anyone, politician or not – is her actions. From what I’ve seen and read, Palin is just more of the same – another good-ole-boy politician interested only in what she can grab for herself and her richest constituents, and throw in favors for her friends and family, all the while telling people whatever they want to hear. I have not seen one single report of her doing anything for anyone below her income bracket. And I’ve heard plenty coming from her that represents the worst from the religious ‘right’ – homophobia, the intention to ban books, limit sex ed and contraception, teach bible mythology as fact, and use her power to fire or crush anyone who gets in the way of her agenda. She doesn’t scare me, but more than anyone I’ve ever seen this high on the political stage, I don’t believe one word that comes out of her mouth.

  242. soopermouse

    rubysecret: Palin is one of the poorest governors. Her income bracket is probably a lot lower than you think.

    Lar: the misoginistic attacks on Palin come almost exclusively from OBama supporters. They are just a rehashing of the same attacks employed against Hillary and show exactly how their minds work. We have seen in this damn thread people adviocating the fact that , since Palin is a republican, she deserves the attacks.

    IT is also very relevant that people who are supposedly feminist are not even remotely scrutinizing Obama with the eyes they give to Palin. That IS a serious issue.

  243. soopermouse

    Here’s the thing:whether we like it or not, the Patriarchy will NOT go down with a bang one day. too many powers that be are too invested in it. Most people do believe however that it will die by the death of a thousand papercuts. Like or dislike Palin, the mere fact of having a woman so close to real power is a serious cut on the patriarcy.
    Unlike Condoleezza Rice, who is a subordinate and nothign more regardless of how high she is, Palin has some real power now ( as a Governor) and is getting closer by the day ( see polls) to actual real power. Regardless of who she is ( and most of the shit you hear about her on the so called progressive blogosphere and media is bullshit that has been debunked thousands of times), she is still a woman. That matters.

  244. Squiggy

    Palin = Cheney period.
    What are all these misogynist lies doing on this website? Soopermouse(him/her/Republicanthem)etc. should have a great forum on a much further Right version of Fox News.

  245. Lar

    “The misoginistic (sic) attacks on Palin come almost exclusively from OBama supporters. They are just a rehashing of the same attacks employed against Hillary and show exactly how their minds work. We have seen in this damn thread people adviocating (sic) the fact that , since Palin is a republican, she deserves the attacks.”

    I’m not condoning any sexism or misogyny on either side of the campaign. However, Obama supporters used sexist attacks against Hillary because she was his opponent in the primary. His supporters are using sexist attacks against Palin now, because she is also his opponent.

    Again, I’m not saying that it’s a good excuse. But do you honestly believe that if Palin or any other woman had been McCain’s opponent in the Republican primary he wouldn’t have done the same thing? They didn’t seem to mind the attacks when they were being hurled at HRC, but now that their own candidate is under similar scrutiny they’re suddenly taken aback?

    I think the hypocrisy is on both sides in that sense, and as I said before it’s because it’s coming from two patriarchy approved candidates. Neither candidate in my mind is innocent of misogyny, regardless of who his running mate is.

    As for Sarah Palin, I like the comment that Lemur posted all the way back on September 11. I don’t support Palin but I am also really bothered by a lot of the misogyny surrounding her candidacy. Today on the news all they talked about was her stylish glasses and the new “school girl” Sarah Palin action figure that comes complete with mini skirt and mesh stockings. Yuck. I’m not sure what that says for the future of feminism, but the present is looking pretty bleak.

  246. zofia

    Unlike Condoleezza Rice, who is a subordinate and nothign more regardless of how high she is, Palin has some real power now ( as a Governor) and is getting closer by the day ( see polls) to actual real power. Regardless of who she is ( and most of the shit you hear about her on the so called progressive blogosphere and media is bullshit that has been debunked thousands of times), she is still a woman. That matters.

    What unbelievable racist tripe.

  247. delphyne

    What liberal women say about Palin:

    “Ideologically, she is their hardcore pornographic centerfold spread,” columnist Cintra Wilson wrote in Salon. “She’s such a power-mad, backwater beauty-pageant casualty, it’s easy to write her off and make fun of her. But in reality I feel as horrified as a ghetto Jew watching the rise of National Socialism.”

    On the website of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, commentator Heather Mallick was even cruder. Palin appeals to “the white trash vote” with her “toned-down version of the porn actress look,” she wrote. “Husband Todd looks like a roughneck. . . What normal father would want Levi ‘I’m a [bleeping] redneck’ Johnson prodding his daughter?”

    From radio talk-show host Randi Rhodes came the smutty suggestion that the governor of Alaska has an unhealthy interest in teenage boys: “She’s friends with all the teenage boys,” Rhodes told her audience last week. “You have to say no when your kids say, ‘Can we sleep over at the Palins?’ No! NO!”

    (Randi Rhodes of course was the one who called Clinton and Ferraro “fucking whores”.

    Sandra Bernhard managed to combine racism and sexism in her vicious attack on Palin:

    “Sandra Bernhard issued a blistering warning to Sarah Palin during a performance of her new one-woman show.
    The Republican V.P. nom would be “gang-raped by my big black brothers” if she enters Manhattan, Bernhard said. Palin is said to be making a campaign stop in New York next week.”

    And if you want to see liberal women driven insane with misogyny pop over to this thread at “feminist” site Jezebel (choicest quote “Kick her square in the uterus”):

    http :// jezebel.com/5045934/why-sarah-palin-incites-near violent-rage-in-normally-reasonable-women

    What’s frightening is these women actually believe they are feminists, when in fact when the bonfires get lit for the next round of witch-burnings, they’ll be the ones passing the boyz the matches.

    If you find you hate Sarah Palin more than you hate any other VP candidate you’ve come across then you’re a misogynist and there is probably no hope for you.

  248. soopermouse

    Lar, what you are saying, even if you don’t realize it, is that the fact that your opponent is a woman is an acceptable excuse for mysoginist attacks. This shows me a complete disregard for ALL women, a “girls have no right to get even close to power” narrative. It is not only an incredibly bad and obtuse weltanschaaung, but , as Obama is currently experiencing, an extremely self defeating one, and as a result, a month and a half before the GEs he’s 10 points down. BY trying to give this weak excuse, you are positioning yourself onthe side of those who are perpetrating this kind of behaviour- misoginy is unacceptale regardless of who the woman it is at is. I should probably not need to explain to you that since this doesn’t happen against male candidates- their gender and personal lives are not used against them in a political race, then this should be obvious.

    The point is not whether “the Republicans would have done the same thing”. woulds shouldacoulda is the language of intellectual dishonesty, since it cannot be proven either way. I will tell you however what the Republicans did manage to do, and the democrats didn’t: they did defend Palin from said attacks.

    Also: there is a severe untruth in your statement. Some Republicans including McCain did protest the attacks levelled at HIllary by the Obama campaign ( and Edwards campaign and John Edwards himself). Did they do it themselves 10 years ago? Hell yeah. Did they do it now? Nope. How’s that for a narrative?

    Zofia: shove it. Condoleezza Rice has never been anything but a lackey of Bush( father and son) and corporate power. Exactly why do you think Chevron had an oil tanker named after her again? While her achievements are spectacular considering all of the obstacles in her path, it is sexist to not admit that Sarah Palin’s accomplishments are equally or even more impressive considering her significantly more difficult tsk of achieving a political career while being an involved mother. There are millions of women who face incredible difficulties to balance the most mundane of careers with one child- having 5 kids is significantly more difficult. You see, if , as we have seen in this thread, one operates under the “all Republicans are evil therefore a female republican is even worse” narrative, then what is aimed at Sarah Palin is correctly aimed at Condoleezza Rice as well. However, if we choose to praise Condoleeza Rice for her achievements then we need to extend the courtesy to Palin. Not to mention that woman appointed in a position of power is a significantly less threat to the Patriarchy than a woman elected in a position of power. The one appointed follows the patriarchal narrative of a woman receiving power from a man. The one elected takes the power for herself.

    Rice never did anything for other women but herself either, and her achievements happened as a result of being a collaborationist as well. Even moreso since the results of her work can be seen all over the middle east, and it ain’t pretty. Even Time admitted “accomplishments as Secretary of State have been modest, and even those have begun to fade”

    Behold

    “Rice said she believes President Bush “has been in exactly the right place” on abortion, “which is we have to respect the culture of life and we have to try and bring people to have respect for it and make this as rare a circumstance as possible” However, she added that she has been “concerned about a government role” but has “tended to agree with those who do not favor federal funding for abortion, because I believe that those who hold a strong moral view on the other side should not be forced to fund” the procedure.”

    So, where’s the severe evisceration of Rice on this matter? We have one woman who is anti abortion and pro contraception who has kept her beliefs for herself, did not try to impose them upon anyone else and who is obeying the rule of the land with regard to abortions ( if any of you wants to put the smears out again you better have some fucking evidence to that – and no, linking to old smears is not evidence – because I am sick and tired of this bullshit) versus the one who is actively supporting changing the laws in accordance with her and her party’s beliefs? Why the fuck isn’t anyone eviscerating Rice for this again if it’s OK to eviscerate Palin?

  249. RollerGreen

    Simple answer to the above post about Palin and Rice.

    Liberal men and women hate conservative fundamentalist women, and they like attacking “unqualified women” as if Bush was a paragon of expertise.

    The hatred of women is so deep in this country, but the power of women is being felt with both conservatives and liberals. I should think that male supremacy is the real evil, and women could unite and over throw it.

    But no, liberal women get freaked out at the thought of a rather plain small town woman made good, and men love to play this.

    Obama, now is holding all these big rallies for women. Guess he can’t take women for granted anymore. He has to read a teleprompter to speak about women’s issues, Palin can just stand up and give a powerful answer to a woman who asks her sincerely about balancing motherhood and career. Palin’s touching answer to that women at today’s rally, “We’ll prove them wrong.”

    Somehow, the more liberals trash Palin, the more appealing she actually becomes. Simple, direct and with an ability to speak to ordinary women in a way that McCain and Obama are incapable of, it’s interesting to see.

    I am encouraged by the progress of all women in this election from both parties. Women have always had the potential to control elections, but now they are realizing it for themselves. This makes patriarchy nervous: What! Women unite! Let’s pour on the mysogyny and sexism so women don’t take the bait.

  250. nick

    In an attempt to address the thread’s initial question, while not ignoring 200 comments, I offer the following:

    Do commenters agree that there seems to be at present a certain alliance between conservative women, “PUMAs”, if you will, and self-described radical women (in this thread and elsewhere)–an alliance cemented by Sarah Palin? If so, anybody have any compelling arguments for how this tactical alliance will do women any good? Is the idea is that the Democrats take women for granted and need to be punished; or is the claim that the Republicans might actually be no worse for women?

    I’m reminded of the temporary alliances between conservatives and radicals re. pornography–different situations, obviously, but again, liberal capitalist commodity culture (the current incarnation of the patriarchy?) as common foe…..

  251. Lar

    First, if you’re going to stand so firmly against something you should learn how to spell it. It gives you credibility.

    That whole acceptability of attacking female opponents comment of yours would make sense except for those times that I said “I’m not condoning this behaviour.” Darn, did I say something without realizing it again?

    I’ll just agree to disagree.

  252. soopermouse

    Be careful Lar, your privilege is showing- English is not my native language. And yes, I tend to make typos when typing fast following a line of thought. But if all you ahve to notice is typos, then maybe you are the one with the problem and not me.

  253. soopermouse

    “However, Obama supporters used sexist attacks against Hillary because she was his opponent in the primary. His supporters are using sexist attacks against Palin now, because she is also his opponent. ”

    I’m not sure about your intention, but this sounds to me like you are somewhat excusing it as acceptable-against-an-opponent-behaviour. It does not however explain the fact that Hillary’s female supporters were targets of misoginy and stereotyping as well, and then with the same fucking breath they ask for their votes. Which is stupid and counter productive. So the question is- do they atatck women because they oppose them or because they hate women pure and simple since they can’t even bring themselves to not attack the women they need?

    So you know what? This is just pure hatred, and proves yet again my point, that this behaviour should nto be rewarded with votes. As Violet Socks already said, the votes are the only leverage women have. “Party unity” and all that shit is in fact giving up the only leverage and receiving shit in return. Selfdefeating in my opinion.

  254. delphyne

    OK, that’s sad I’ve tried to post some extreme misogyny about Palin from Randi Rhodes; Sandra Bernhard, who wants to see Palin raped by black men – managing racism and sexism a winning combination); Cintra Wilson and Heather Mallcik who both liken Palin to a porn star; and the “feminist” gals at Jezebel who call Palin a c**t and say “Kick her in the uterus”, and it keeps going into moderation.

    Are liberal women that lacking in self-reflection that they are unable to see their own misogyny?

  255. saltyC

    This is such a huge achilles heel on the Left and no one (except here and few other places)is talking about it. Sad that they’ll lose an election over it; even sadder that it’s there, festering and growing.

  256. Rhus

    “What makes McCain good for me?
    1. He is very unlikely to run again in 4 years.”

    Oh, for whatever’s sake. What a brilliant piece of reasoning.
    McCain thought that anybody with an uterus would sway women’s votes. Clearly he has succeeded with you. Go vote for him, then, and please stop contorting arguments to show that Palin is somehow qualified. Not even her own party believes that. Go vote along with fundies and people who reason “but he/she is one of us.” (By the way, the same argument that seemed to work with Bush, right? The man born with a silver foot in his mouth, I forget who said that.) Just please stop blabbering about the “accomplishments” of a woman who probably believes that the world was created in seven days, but takes good care of not saying so.

    About her impact on feminism, many women have expressed the frustration that the progressive ones pave the way for these others to reap benefits. Hers is yet another example and we are reacting with a sigh at the irony. I suppose it’s a constant in the movement, in any progressive movement, but right now I don’t have the broader perspective. Could Palin’s visibility help to get future people like Graça Machel or Ellen Johnston to prominence? I can’t say when I feel as angry as now at the suggestion that they are interchangeable. I just nod when Lemur says, “It sucks to defend someone you’d gladly see exiled back to the tundra.”

    By the way, now that I mention this side of the matter, of course we should denounce misogynistic attacks against Palin. Several people have expressed that idea in this thread. They’re doing a good job in Shakesville about some of the most egregious instances. It can be simultaneously said that hers, her boss’ and her party’s policies are abhorrent and antiwomen.

  257. Rhus

    (Sorry. I meant Ellen Johnson, Johnson-Sirleaf. Tsk.)

  258. zofia

    Zofia: shove it

    How eloquent.

    More attempts at silencing. Shaming and silencing; you’re by the book.

    Why the fuck isn’t anyone eviscerating Rice for this again if it’s OK to eviscerate Palin?

    I do not condone “eviscerating” any woman, that is your hypocritical tactic.

  259. soopermouse

    Rhus:
    “Oh, for whatever’s sake. What a brilliant piece of reasoning.”
    Congratulations, you are taking something out of context and react as if it is the main argument. Admirable dishonesty, which is followed by utter awe at the rest of your statement:

    “I just nod when Lemur says, “It sucks to defend someone you’d gladly see exiled back to the tundra.””

    Congratulations, you are sexist. You may not realize it, but stating you want to exile a woman for having the audacity to have a political career when not agreeing with you is not only sexist, but utterly disgusting. It is nice to see that you are showing your colours so easily.
    Hopefully I do not need to explain to you that yes, Palin has a right to have a political career even if her oppinions are different from yours.

    “Just please stop blabbering about the “accomplishments” of a woman ”
    Achieving elected office is a significant achievement for everyone whether you like them or not. You don’t get to call them “not accomplishments” unless you have managed to equal them or do better. How many women governors are there again? And it sure as hell beats a CV padding job as a failed community organizer (http://sugarnspice.typepad.com/sugar_n_spicea_meeting_pl/2008/09/obama-poor-excu.html).

    “who probably believes that the world was created in seven days, but takes good care of not saying so.”

    Look at the lie go. See, this is the problem with people like you: you’re good with the lies and assumptions to serve your cause. That makes you a very dishonest person in my opinion.

    I doubt Sarah Palin wants to exile you or anyone like you for not agreeing with her. Unlike you, she has managed to never say or give the slightest hint of that sort of belief. That probably makes her a better person than you are.

    Zofia: pardon me for telling you to shove your ad hominem. I am aware you were hoping to intimidate and shame me with the “everything non appreciative said about a person of colour is racist” crap, unfortunately that kind of utter bullshit doesn’t work on me.

    As far as the evisceration goes: there has been plenty of it done on Palin in this very thread. Proving that the answer to delphyne’s question is “yes, they are, look at the fine examples in this very discussion”.

  260. goblinbee

    soopermouse: “And yes, I tend to make typos when typing fast following a line of thought.”

    Then have some self-pride (and some respect for your readers) and go back and proofread before hitting the blame button!

  261. butterflywings

    Collaborateuse?!
    Seriously?!

    I have NO fondness for Palin, at all. But yelling “COLLABORATOR!” at women with whom we disagree, or who do things we do not like (like, perhaps, wear make-up or heels ;-)) then we’re no better than misogynists. It smacks of victim-blaming (“hey, if she had been wearing Good Feminist baggy jeans and baggy T-shirt and no make-up and short hair she wouldn’t have been harrassed/ raped!”).

    MEN need to “de-otherise” us. Yes, MEN. They have to take us seriously whether we are wearing DMs, dungarees, short hair and no make-up, or heels and a pink fluffy sweater and lipstick. Really. Because women are human beings – doesn’t matter what we look like or what we do.

  262. soopermouse

    goblinee: what would there be the point? I do have to leave something to grasp at for those who can’t counterargue my points , otherwise I’d be a really awful person.

    Butterflywings: it would appear that some women also need to de otherize the women who don’t agree with them.

  263. delphyne

    You know having Mrs Thatcher as prime minister in the UK despite the fact she was a right-wing nightmare who did nothing for women (apart from telling South Yorkshire Police to pull their finger out on the Yorkshire Ripper investigation because she thought they weren’t taking it seriously enough because it was women who were being murdered) still made a difference for women. It showed that women could be in power, could make decisions, could lead men at a time when it was still pretty much the consensus that women could do none of those things. Because what is the alternative for us – men being in power, men making decisions, men being the leaders?

    That’s what astonishes me when women, particularly feminists, are so vehement in their misogynist hatred for Palin. A woman in power does lift all women, it gives us all other role models than being second best to men. The hand-maidens of Obama haven’t worked that one out yet – they’d rather support a misogynist than lay off another woman.

  264. soopermouse

    What delphyne said. There is nothing more to say.

  265. smmo

    I do have to leave something to grasp at for those who can’t counterargue my points , otherwise I’d be a really awful person.

    Don’t worry soopermouse, I think you’ve got it covered either way.

    Re the “ANY women in power lifts all women” argument. Whatever good a Thatcher does symbolically, she erases practically.

  266. jezebella

    soopermouse, you’re boring when you’re not offensive. could you maybe use yr OWN blog as a soapbox?

  267. soopermouse

    smmo:
    the significant increase in the number of female politicians in the UK post Thatchers contradicts you.

    Jezebella: I apologize for my failure to post urban myths debunked by Snopes month ago and DK memes instead of actual valid and documented points. However, I do believe that you are fulfilling the quota for the both of us on your blog.

    In case you haven’t noticed quite yet, I am very hard to intimidate and silence. I believe your beloved Messiah will issue you with some new instructions soon. Or you can start here http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lea-lane/eat-crow-hell-yes-to-win_b_126712.html. Have a nice day.

  268. larkspur

    I am not going to vote for McCain-Palin. I do not think Palin (or McCain) would best represent the people of this country. I like Hillary Clinton a lot. I’m glad she will still be a strong voice in the Senate.

    I kind of like Barack Obama. I agree with much of what he has to say. I think Michelle Obama is a good strong woman in her own right, and just as with the Clintons, I think her influence is a big plus, and no small consideration for me in deciding to vote Obama-Biden.

    If Obama-Biden are elected, the very next day, I will be on their case. When they stumble, when they do something, or fail to do something, that results in people like me (female human beings) being sidelined, marginalized, or disrespected, I will yell at them so everybody can hear me.

    I am just about through with this thread. I’m going to extricate myself from this automatic, apparently never-ending loop of soopermouse and delphyne and others saying that if I back Obama, I support misogynistic, hateful attacks on Sarah Palin. A vote for Obama does not mean I hate myself, or I hate you, or I hate Palin, or that I’m fine with anyone calling her names like “stupid cunt”.

    I saw all this internecine shit back in the late 60s and early 70s, and it made me nuts back then, too. For some people, no one is ever pure enough, correct enough, doctrinaire enough. Why on earth does anyone feel entitled to assume I cannot support an Obama presidency and still be ready, willing, and able to (metaphorically) kick his ass when I think he’s messing up? We’re always on the way, people. We never ever get there. We just keep going.

    PS: I don’t like Condoleeza Rice. I do not think she has served well, or helped out, or advanced any good cause. There’d be no place for her in my fantasy cabinet. But she’s qualified for her job. No one should deny her that.

  269. soopermouse

    Larkspur:
    “Why on earth does anyone feel entitled to assume I cannot support an Obama presidency and still be ready, willing, and able to (metaphorically) kick his ass when I think he’s messing up?”

    so, you don’t think he has messed up yet? At all?

    “If Obama-Biden are elected, the very next day, I will be on their case. ”

    You mean when you no longer have any leverage to hold over them because you have already voted for them? Isn’t that like locking the barn after the cow has gone?

    “When they stumble, when they do something, or fail to do something, that results in people like me (female human beings) being sidelined, marginalized, or disrespected, I will yell at them so everybody can hear me.”

    Both Obama and Biden have done quite a bit of that in the past months. Have you yelled at them yet? Or does accountability only become an option after the election when there is fuck all to do about it anymore ( or at least for the next 4 years)?

    Tell me, if you are honestly supporting Obama, what have you done after himself and his campaign started and successfully employed the sexist attacks agaisnt Hillary? What did you do about “claws come out”? “periodically feeling down”? “likeable enough”? “sweetie”? Because if you haven’t done anything about them when they happened and you are still planning to vote for Obama after them- I won’t even go into the attacks by his surrogates and campaign at this point, just Obama’s own words- then you are condoning and approving of his behaviour, and rewarding said behaviour with your vote. Let me repeat that: you reward a man for his sexist attacks against a woman. That is what you are doing. And that, in my opinion, makes you a “collaborateuse” just as well.

  270. panoptical

    I find it shocking how much static soopermoose is able to throw at us without actually seeming to absorb any information that challenges her preconceived support for McCain – that, I remind everyone, started before he nominated Palin.

    Soopermoose linked us to an article. I now quote text from that article.

    “Know your anti-female McCain political facts. Here comes the logic. Make a cheat-sheet if necessary. If Palin can get past her ignorance about The Bush Doctrine and the Constitution in prime time, you can learn these few talking points. Remind HRC supporters that several Supreme Court nominees (and Roe v Wade) are in the balance. Discuss McCain/Palin’s ultra-conservative record, and stands on right- to- life, guns, creationism, you name it. You’ll need to do some homework here. Wikipedia and Google are there for you at all times.

    Know your anti-female McCain emotional facts. If the above doesn’t do it, remain low-key, with a pleasant visage. Remind HRC supporters that McCain left his disfigured first wife who waited loyally for him and raised their children alone, to have an affair with Cindy, the current, rich, much younger wife. But aha, continuing this behavior, he probably cheated on this trophy with blonde lobbyist, Vicky Isenman. (Where is this woman? In a rendition prison in Syria till after the election? Hello, National Enquirer.)

    Remind the Hillary fan that McCain called his $300k-suited trophy wife the C- word in public, and has a notoriously terrible temper. And worst of all, and leave this for the climax of this entire exercise: McCain publicly laughed at the allusion to HRC as a “bitch” and — lowest of the low — made that public Chelsea Clinton ugly joke when she was just a teen.”

    Soopermoose – what did you think when you read these three paragraphs? Did you think, “Now this is the type of behavior that I want to reward with votes!”

    Also, I know I’m like the third or fourth person to point this out, but you still haven’t managed to spell “misogyny” or “misogynist” correctly even once. I know you’ve said that English is not your first language, so feel free to just cut and paste the words from this or any of the other fifty posts on this thread where they appear spelled correctly.

  271. Rhus

    Larkspur says, “I am just about through with this thread.”

    Well, it has been clear since long ago that soopermouse would derange the thread. She/he would pounce upon anybody with distortions, half-truths, wild assumptions, moving goalposts, ad hominem attacks — and, what’s worse, drowning the thread in loooong-winded comments. What Jezebella said.

    And yet I have enjoyed reading most of you. For example, I have liked your own explanation, Larkspur — thank you. I don’t mind leaving soopermouse her soap-box now. Most people will be throwing up their hands, but the ones who took the trouble to write and argue were very interesting. I wouldn’t have minded reading an honest discussion with Delphyne, but unfortunately soopermouse purporting to be on her side prevents it.

  272. soopermouse

    actually panoptical, you have not quite managed to throw any information, but thank you for your hurt feewings. I made it very clear before: it is not a matter of supporting McCain as much as it is one of working against Obama. There is a whole movement out there that appears to share those goals, and, by the look of those polls, it is succeeding. Palin is an additional motive for a vote for McCain in that context. You also managed to not even once point that I was and still am a Hillary supporter. So, how’s about that half truth? Because I can point out a couple of yours without even looking that deep. Go figure. Or do I seriously have to explain to you the reasons why I have linked that column to begin with? You are operating within a realm in which actual facts and the assumptions you make to serve you have the same value, and I am afraid that I cannot follow you to the place where madness lies. You are making assumptions, I present facts. It’s a nice and clear cut difference between the two of us, and if at the end of the day all you have to complain about is my spelling, then you obviously don’t have much to begin with.

    Rhus:
    last I have checked, I have tried and at least partially succeeded to maintain my calm despite the pile-on on me. So, you believe that you wanting to exile Sarah Palin is not misogyny? Amazing.

    Don’t worry, I’m sure there is more than one soul who would agree with your selfblinding attempts at logic and painful distortions. As Violet Socks said it better than me, you’re tying yourself in knots trying to justify your misogyny as political enlightement. There is nothing right in that statement you agreed with, and you know it (hopefully, anyway).

  273. tinfoil hattie

    Wow. Complaining about soopermouse’s spelling, because she won’t go away and quit saying things you disagree with? For crying out loud. That’s the best you’ve got? “You can’t spell, nyaah, you’re a MORON, use SPELLCHECK”? Yeesh.

    Also, Lar, I guess you haven’t figured out the addendum to Godwin’s Law: Sooner or later, every discussion on the internet will devolve into Obama v. Clinton or Obama v. McCain. That’s all there is to talk about anymore.

    And panoptical, I think it’s interesting that you’re using rumor and innuendo (did YOU hear McCain call his wife a cunt? did YOU stand there and watch him have an affair with Isenman?) to bolster your argument about how bad McCain is for women.

    EVERY male candidate is bad for women, because EVERY male candidate benefits from patriarchy. And men aren’t going to give up patriarchy. This also means some women candidates will be bad for women, because they support the patriarchy for various reasons — but mosly, as a means of survival.

    Oppression leads to very ugly behavior among the oppressed.

  274. Vinaigrette Girl

    Some documentable and reliable facts on women in government and the influence of M. Thatcher, or, Why We Need Leaders Who Can Read Without An Autocue.

    Re: Margaret Thatcher’s influence on women in government:

    1)From a fairly recent Parliamentary report, well worth reading in its entirety, and not hideously long (http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/M04.pdf):

    “The 1979 election [in which Mrs. Thatcher was elected PM] also returned the lowest number of women candidates in 30 years. Only one other woman held high office during Thatcher’s [11] years in government (Baroness Young).”

    Note: this means that there were more women MPs before she pitched up as PM. BEFORE. Her influence on what happened afterwards is fictitious. Moerover, the number of women returned in 1997 was in part a product of [GASP! HORROR!] liberal doods and other women creating women-only lists. So cynical. (sigh)

    2) from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, at the local.gov.uk website, reporting on 8 September 2008:

    “The commission’s annual report, Sex and Power, revealed there are just 64 women council leaders out of 448 positions and the number of women chief executives has dropped in the last year from 20.6% to 19.5%.

    The commission’s annual index of women in positions of authority is in its fifth year and the trend emerging is one of reversal or stalled progress, with only a few significant increases.

    The number of women council leaders rose by .5% in the past year which follows a drop from 16.6% in 2004 to 14.3% in 2007/8. Women’s average representation in top jobs over the last five years is 26.6%.

    And, the report shows, there are fewer women MPs in Westminster, where they make up just 19.3% of all MPs. Women’s representation among FTSE 100 directors has improved slightly from 10.4 to 11%.

    The commission has likened women’s progress to ‘a snail’s pace’.”

    So, the numbers indicate that the Thatcher effect is nonexistent; and indeed, the current lot of Tories remain as useless as ever at promoting women in their own party.

  275. delphyne

    The numbers indicate nothing of the sort Vinaigrette Girl, you do understand that to support your argument you’d have to find numbers to prove that things were either the same or better pre-1979? Of course they weren’t – they were much, much worse.

    Women have increased visibility in powerful positions across the United Kingdom since Thatcher’s time. It’s not happening fast enough, but that’s male supremacy for you – men cling to power wherever possible and if they can get other women to attack women for wanting to gain power then so much the better for them.

    Thatcher being in charge did make a difference, it changed the way people viewed women and made overt sexism a lot more difficult to get away with, I can’t believe you want to deny that.

    “I am just about through with this thread. I’m going to extricate myself from this automatic, apparently never-ending loop of soopermouse and delphyne and others saying that if I back Obama, I support misogynistic, hateful attacks on Sarah Palin.”

    Eh no, that’s not what I said. I said if you call Sarah Palin unqualified, which you did, and don’t hold Obama to the same standard even though he’s going for president not vice president, you are suffering from a nasty case of sexist double standards and using standard misogyny to attack a woman. It’s not a difficult argument to understand although it’s an easy to misrepresent apparently.

    Support who you want, just cut out the sexism please.

  276. Vinaigrette Girl

    Delphyne, you may have mixed me up with another poster.

    I take the figure “the lowest number of women MPs for thirty years” to mean that between 1949 and 1979 there were more women returned to Parliament at each General Election than there were in 1979. That is the only possible meaning of that sentence.

    As for Palin and Obama, you and I appear to have different definitions of what counts as “qualification”. My questioning of Palin’s qualifications isn’t misogyny; it is based on whether I think she has the intellectual rigor or capacity, or the organisational experience, to do the job she is campaigning to do. I think that his persistence and thoroughness, as well as the sheer ability to master complex information and retain it, is vastly superior as a resource to the nation than whatever Sarah Palin’s five miscellaneous colleges may have given her. I think she is intellectually incapable of the job, rivalling Spiro Agnew.

  277. delphyne

    Thatcher wasn’t responsible for the 1979 election, the influence of her prime ministership obviously hadn’t happened then as she wasn’t prime minister previous to that. My point is that after Thatcher women went into the House of Commons in greater numbers than previously. During her term in office, the highest ever number of women were elected to the House of Commons and the numbers continued to increase after that. Look at the results of the elections following hers in 1979:

    1979 – 3.0% women
    1983 – 3.5% women
    1987 – 6.3% women
    1992 – 9.2% women
    1997 – 18.2% women
    2001 – 17.9% women
    2005 – 19.8% women

    In the years before the numbers were static, hovering between 1 and 4 per cent.

    The same is true of female cabinet ministers – in the seventy years prior to Thatcher there was a sum total of 7 female cabinet ministers. In the thirty odd years during and after her there have been 20. As I’ve already said, she did nothing for women, but her mere presence meant women had to be taken seriously and included as they never had done before.

    As for your insults about Sarah Palin’s intelligence, that’s the kind of sexist attack I’ve come to expect from liberal women.

    It’s a joke to talk about Obama’s ablility to master complex subjects. Most of his policy ideas have been “what she said”, in other words copying Clinton. He would probably have improved that capacity if he had actually taken some time to get executive experience or pilot his own legislation in the Senate before running for one of the world’s toughest jobs.

  278. Natalia

    Palin is ESPECIALLY unqualified, even when compared to equally young Barack Obama, though the person we should really be comparing her to is Biden.

    She only got her passport last year. Her implication that she is qualified to work on relations with Russia because you can see Russia from parts of Alaska does not only betray her lack of qualification, it is an insult to the people she wishes to serve.

    This alone strikes me as terribly unintelligent (yes! I call her unintelligent! Put the scarlet “S” on me!). The things she says? Even with smarty=pants Karl Rove crafting her image, I am not impressed. And by comparison, the Gibson interview was a series of softballs. Imagine if they put her in a room with someone similar to Jeremy Paxman (not that this would ever happen because the press, apparently, must show sufficient “deference” to this person – even though the last time I checked, this isn’t Versailles in the 17th century).

    A woman in power is not automatically good for women. Take a look at Yulia Tymoshenko. She’s a very smart, very tough politician, but what has she done for women in Ukraine? Her address on International Women’s Day was even more sexist than Yuschenko’s.

    Blargh.

    As for Thatcher, she was despised. Her election has nothing to do with the good trends.

  279. panoptical

    Delphyne, Vinaigrette Girl,

    Correlation does not imply causality. Without a control, it is impossible to tell whether Thatcher’s election influenced the number of women in government for the good, for the bad, or not at all. It is possible that the increase in women in parliament after Thatcher was caused by Thatcher’s election, and it is also possible that Thatcher’s election and the increase in the number of women in parliament were both part of the same trend to elect more women, and it is also possible that if Thatcher had not been elected even more women would have later been elected. There is simply no way to know.

    Personally, I think that there is some merit to the idea that having women in highly visible positions of power will tend to pave the way for more women to hold these positions in the future. For example, I think that if HRC hadn’t come so close to getting the Democratic nomination, the Republicans would never have nominated Palin.

    However, I also think that there’s something to the idea that having women-hating women in those positions of power is a really bad thing. What is it going to say about our society if HRC couldn’t get elected but Sarah Palin does? It’s going to say that a woman can’t get power of her own accord, but must be granted it by a man (McCain). It’s going to say that a progressive, pro-woman woman isn’t palatable to our nation, but a lying, thieving, pro-rape godbag is.

    I haven’t ever said that Palin is unintelligent, or unqualified, or that the demands of motherhood would be too much for her. I’m just trying to point out that she is such a terrible person that if she were not also a female I don’t think that there would be any debate at all here on IBTP whether or not she ought to hold high office.

    In my mind the only question is, does the benefit of having a woman as VP outweigh the harm that a McCain/Palin presidency would do to women on other fronts?

  280. Natalia

    For example, I think that if HRC hadn’t come so close to getting the Democratic nomination, the Republicans would never have nominated Palin.

    I agree. But I keep thinking that surely there were other potential VP picks that would have been… better? I won’t call myself a fan of Condoleeza Rice, but she would have been a much better candidate. I doubt she’d want the job, but if she had, I would have been excited to see her included. A worthy opponent indeed.

  281. blondie

    At the risk of being shown a violator myself, please “[c]ast your jaundiced eye upon” the FAQ (the link for which is located immediately above the box in which you type your comment), which include blamer guidelines such as requests for proper grammar and spelling, non-abusive language, etc.

  282. jmmeem

    Is anyone else reminded of Eva Perón, or “Evita,” as she was commonly known? This is not the first time that a woman has been used as a facade of feminism in order to further a dominant male politician. She helped push women’s suffrage in Argentina so that her husband would have the newly awarded women’s votes in the election in 1946. What is scary is that this sort of thing continues to happen in 2008.

  283. Vinaigrette Girl

    It is not sexist of me to say that another woman is unintelligent any more than it is sexist for me to opine that a man is unintelligent. It may well be elitist, but that’s another matter.

    If Sarah Palin wanted to be head of sports broadcasting at NBC I could support her in that role. Sadly, she isn’t applying for that job. She wants to be a heartbeat away from running the United States , and have a hand in running it from the White house. In that role she would be as dangerous as her principal, who is, in my view, an unreliable chancer with poor long-term judgement, little sense of long-term historical narratives, no understanding of crucial elements of Islam, and an over-developed faculty for “otherizing” pretty well all of us who aren’t OWM. (Is that “sexist” comment on McCain?)

    The relativism which suggests that all talents are always equally valid in any context as long as those talents are exercised by a woman is, in my view, bankrupt.

    Ad a side note, I don’t suggest that correlation equals causality. I contest the idea that Margaret Thatcher’s term of office did as much for women in politics as many people contend, and I suggest that people who insist that the percentages of women MPs who appeared after 1979 were in some way caused by the Thatcher Effect don’t place their argument in an accurate historical context.

  284. other orange

    However, I also think that there’s something to the idea that having women-hating women in those positions of power is a really bad thing. What is it going to say about our society if HRC couldn’t get elected but Sarah Palin does? It’s going to say that a woman can’t get power of her own accord, but must be granted it by a man (McCain). It’s going to say that a progressive, pro-woman woman isn’t palatable to our nation, but a lying, thieving, pro-rape godbag is.

    Panoptical, well-put.

    That’s exactly my position on this- I was a HRC supporter and it has already been bitter to watch the press rub her nose in the Palin situation. If having any woman in power was a good thing, I guess we can all get behind a Coulter/Schafly ticket in 2012, right ?

    IBTP.

  285. Vinaigrette Girl

    Bit of history: the Rt Hon Margaret Bondfield was appointed Minister of Labour in 1929, having been Parliamentary Secretary in the Ministry from 1924.

    No doubt someone will say she was a tokenist tool and unrepresentative of the One True Way of Real Feminism.

    Margaret Thatcher had her first degree from Oxford (elitism! oh noez!) and a doctorate (more elitism) and was a research chemist in industry (still more elitism because she wasn’t sufficiently underpaid to have any authenticity), twins (genetic elitism, getting both of them out of the way) and a millionaire husband (still more capitalist toolery).

    But she still got as far as she did by showing other people she was intellectually and temperamentally *qualified* to do serious, applied, committed work: whatever else she was (I Am Not A Thatcherite), she was self-disciplined and intelligent and could prove it.

    But that’s a typical liberal elitist and sexist remark, praising a political opponent for her intelligence and ability to complete sustained programmes even if one disagrees with her 100%?

    Oh, wait.

  286. delphyne

    I think Thatcher got to be Prime Minister in a large part because of the feminist movement. Women were working to break barriers all over the place at that point and I think Thatcher was riding that wave, although she’d never have admitted it. Pre the feminist movement the country would never have accepted a woman prime minister.

    It’s funny how feminists don’t want to give women or feminism any credit whatsoever for women’s advancement – it was the liberal doods what done it for us. Thank you boyz! You’re too kind.

    Anyhow, one of the Vice Presidential candidates made this remark last week. Can you spot the schoolboy errors and guess which one it was? (here’s a hint, it’s the one that nobody has criticised for lacking in qualifications or intellectual ability):

    “When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed. He said, ‘look, here’s what happened.’”

    “It is not sexist of me to say that another woman is unintelligent any more than it is sexist for me to opine that a man is unintelligent.”

    Get thee to Feminism 101, Vinaigrette Girl (aren’t you embarrassed calling yourself a “girl” when you’re a woman by the way – I take it you’re over 18). Calling women stupid when they aren’t is one of the favourite tools in the sexists’ handbook. There doesn’t have to be any evidence, a person can just pronounce a woman is stupid and everybody immediately believes it. There is no evidence that Palin is thick, there is plenty to the contrary – stupid people don’t rise to political heights off their own bat as she did to become governor of Alaska. Stupid women definitely don’t because the odds are so greatly stacked against us.

  287. other orange

    Get thee to Feminism 101, Vinaigrette Girl (aren’t you embarrassed calling yourself a “girl” when you’re a woman by the way…

    Um.

    Please don’t go there. Speaking of feminism 101, let’s not police each other’s online handles.

    It’s funny how feminists don’t want to give women or feminism any credit whatsoever for women’s advancement – it was the liberal doods what done it for us. Thank you boyz! You’re too kind.

    Delphyne, you and I agree on several points (not the least of which is that liberal men aren’t the angels they pretend to be, and should never be given any more credit than they’ve earned) but I have to take a second to point out, again, Panoptical’s very good point: that when Palin advances to the detriment of Clinton (and in fact it’s triggered some very nasty attacks on Clinton for being the “wrong kind” of woman, whereas Palin is the “right kind”) it puts the spotlight on the fact that Palin’s advancement came through McCain. I personally believe it sends a message that if women want to get ahead, they’d better play the right games and attach themselves to the right men; they’d also better be both motherly and sexy, feisty and demure in the right places, and always back the big guy’s platforms. More of the same “be everything that we want you to be, or else” message from men and the media.

  288. Vinaigrette Girl

    I give feminism all kinds of credit, all the time, but I don’t take an ahistorical point of view about it. And political philosophy has to be put into action for it to have effect; the decisive action that was taken in the UK by labour was to make female-only lists, in 1997. That was, I believe, very much the power of feminism, incarnated: but it required male as well as female action to make it happen. Sorry, but it’s true: there weren’t enough women in the mix to make that structural change purely from a majority power base. I make no claims for how wonderful liberal men are, they aren’t, but they had to collaborate with feminist women and come to terms with female voters.

    I don’t think becoming Governor of Alaska tells me anything except that Sarah Palin got elected; it may encourage me to infer a great deal about all kinds of factors, from apathy amongst some voters to lack of access to voting facilities to effectiveness of advertising – all kinds of extraneous factors, but it says nothing to me about Sarah Palin’s actual intelligence.

    As I said, if she wanted to make progress in journalism, I would have no problem with her or her intelligence. It’s her intelligence in the context of this job that I question; and her intelligence over a number of questions I hold to be fundamental, like whether creationism really belongs in a science curriculum, that causes me to question her innate ability to cope with lengthy, detailed arguments requiring a certain amount of solid knowledge. That may make me elitist, but not sexist.

    I’m 51. I’m a lot of things in RL but my self-ironising alter-ego is a superheroine named Vinaigrette Girl, Dresser of Salads. I’m sorry you don’t like it; it makes me laugh.

  289. saltyC

    Is it just the creationsim thing that means Palin is dumb? To me, that points out that she’s pandering, just as Obama panders when he says a woman’s mental health is not a good enough reason for her to be allowed to have an abortion. Or maybe he really believes it. Which is stupid. Oh but he went to an Ivy league school, so he must be smarter than someone who went to a less expensive local school. Or maybe that’s stupid. I’m not voting for her but face it, most attacks I’ve seen against Palin are really really dumb.

  290. delphyne

    So nobody is worried that the democratic VP candidate is STUPID enough to believe that FDR was president in 1929 and that he appeared on broadcast television to talk about it to the nation when television networks didn’t even exist? No volunteers to get worried about that and wonder if he has any grasp of US political history whatsoever?

    Obama thinks there are 57 states in the US. Does that disqualify him from being president in that he’s a bit clueless about what he’ll actually be governing if he were to win?

    Of course it doesn’t because he’s got a PENIS as does Biden, and if there’s one thing we feminists can admire it’s penises. It qualifies you for a job in a way that being penisless just can’t compete with. All your errors can be ignored, all your stupidity and lack of grasp of the subjects can be waved away in place of a rock solid conviction that despite any evidence to the contrary your penis will equip you to do the job. On the other hand being minus a penis means that any achievements you do have, you know small things like being governor of Alaska, will count for absolutely nothing. Being penisless means you should know your place – stick to what we tell you you’re good at girly and leave the politics to the boys.

    Otherorange, Hillary lost nothing by Palin’s appointment. The only person who caused her detriment was Obama who stomped all over her with his sexist campaign and calls for her to get out of the race when she was beating him. The cheating and bending of the rules to ensure that he, the man, triumphed over the woman who was the best qualified and best equipped candidate were business as usual in the patriarchy.

  291. delphyne

    I was skimming over your posts Panoptical, because I’m pretty sure you’re a dood and thus I find myself incredibly uninterested in any pronouncements you might have about sexism or feminism, but this is actually sickening:

    “It’s going to say that a progressive, pro-woman woman isn’t palatable to our nation, but a lying, thieving, pro-rape godbag is.”

    How dare you talk about a woman like this. Who do you think you are to make these kinds of slanders on her? This is exactly the kind of shit I expect from liberal men and is exactly why I keep myself so very far away from them. Misogyny doesn’t know a party: the democrats are equally as bad as the rethugs, the left as hateful towards women as the right. Appalling.

  292. delphyne

    Also Hillary was acceptable to the US nation – she got more votes than any other primary candidate in history. Who she wasn’t acceptable to was the misogynistic thugs of the mainstream media and the democratic party. Most polls said she had a better chance of beating McCain than Obama did.

    Start looking for the guilty parties instead of attempting to mire everybody in collective guilt.

  293. other orange

    Delphyne, I’d like to look at “…lying, thieving, pro-rape godbag.”

    Palin has lied. She has flat-out lied about the Bridge to Nowhere and her involvement in the project. She did not claim to have “rejected” it until after it was cancelled; even then, she did not return the earmarked money.

    I don’t know about theft, so I cannot address it.

    As regards the rape kits: it was Sarah Palin’s responsibility to change this policy. Did she personally write this policy ? Probably not. However, it is literally impossible that as mayor she was unaware of it- she authorized Charlie Fannon to speak to the press in defense of the practice. Anyone who defends such a heinous, anti-victim policy as legitimate is, arguably, pro-rape.

    And the last charge, godbag, is one that’s been leveled at many an individual here on IBTP. I would argue that her association with a radical fundamentalist church, as well as her personal stances on moral issues such as “the sanctity of life” (and her willingness to legislate this, as evidenced by her association with the anti-VAWA McCain) register Palin as firmly in the godbag camp.

    Panoptical’s comment did not include any assessment of Palin;s intelligence, her qualifications and background, or her gender. It merely listed reflections on her actual behavior as a public individual and an authority figure, not personal judgements on her status as a woman.

    Have sexist attacks been used to discredit women for, say, the entire history of the world ? Yes. Does that mean we have to fall over ourselves in love and devotion for any woman able to manipulate the political machine ?

    Hardly.

  294. Natalia

    Is it just the creationsim thing that means Palin is dumb?

    I don’t think Palin “is dumb” = I think she makes terribly unintelligent statements that betray a woeful lack of qualification for the position she is vying for.

    I think there is a reason why the press is being bullied into coddling her, much more so than any other politician in recent memory.

    I think her comments on Russia are insulting.

    I think her use of “choice” rhetoric in advancing a pro-forced abortion stance is both disingenuous and lacking in any real awareness of the issue at hand.

    I think that a politician who only got her passport last year, despite obviously having the means to travel outside the country at some point, is, at the very LEAST, unprepared to be VP of this nation – considering the U.S. is a major world power.

    Being green is one thing, but some *basic interest* in the outside world ought to be required, after all.

    I could go on.

  295. delphyne

    The only one I’d agree with is godbag, and I wouldn’t even agree with that because it’s really rude and I wouldn’t use that sort of language about anyone. It’s ignorant.

    Calling a woman a liar, a thief and pro-rape, is sexist. These are insults that would never be flung at a man in the same position. Pro-rape is particularly heinous, I can’t even find the words to describe what a terrible thing that is to say about a woman, particularly a woman who every left-wing man seems to be fantasising about raping at the moment and whose gang-rape one lefty comedian, Sandra Bernhard, was publicly cheering on as she racistly called black men gang rapists. The fact that you are doing mental gymnastics to justify calling her that is making me feel a bit ill to be honest. Half of those lefty men calling her pro-rape are probably rapists themselves or at least think about it, but don’t let that get in the way of supporting them trying to destroy a woman.

    Feminism means defending all women from sexism, not just the women we agree with. You do know that every man who feels able to call Palin those names will be as happy to call you or any other left-wing woman the same thing, when you or they piss him off?

    God you’re even calling her manipulative now. Lets keep those sexist stereotypes coming shall we?

  296. other orange

    Calling a woman a liar, a thief and pro-rape, is sexist. These are insults that would never be flung at a man in the same position.

    John McCain is a liar (again, I can’t call Palin a thief and I can’t personally call McCain one either) and he is, like Palin, arguably pro-rape considering his vote against the Violence Against Women Act.

    “Liar” isn’t a gender-specific insult, unless you believe that only women are untrustworthy. I don’t. And I’ll fling terms like these at men all day long, without so much as a break for lunch.

    Feminism means defending all women from sexism, not just the women we agree with.

    Yep. Which is why I haven’t resorted to sexist attacks like calling her a bimbo or a Barbie. I’ve criticised her policies and her platform. And Jesus, if you can’t (or won’t) admit the difference between insulting her intelligence as a woman and insulting her poor social programming (which, check upthread, I’ve been equally harsh on McCain, if not more so) please take a second look. Feminism does not give politicans (who are responsible for protecting the lives and rights of millions of women) carte blanche because of their gender- if Palin wants the endorsement of feminists, she had better outline some pro-feminist positions mighty quickly.

    God you’re even calling her manipulative now. Lets keep those sexist stereotypes coming shall we?

    Don’t reach so far- you might pull something. Manipulate, 1: to treat or operate with or as if with the hands or by mechanical means especially in a skillful manner; 2: to manage or utilize skillfully. Palin is a good politician, and she uses the media and political tools at her disposal effectively. It was actually a compliment. If you’d like me to describe a man who manipulates things, McCain too has manipulated the political machine; crafting an image of a honorable and steadfastly moral man so far removed from his actual positions as to be practically identity fraud.

    And, oh my, have I been rude ? I’d never want to be rude to anyone, how unladylike ! I particularly would never want to be rude to anyone who harbors a deep desire to remove my reproductive rights, prolong a war, trash my planet and crash my economic stability, and who is actively seeking the political power to do so.

    Oh, wait. I’m not sure I could possibly be rude enough in those circumstances.

  297. norbizness

    Now this definitely speaks to the confidence in and respect shown to the GOP Vice-Presidential candidate by her selectors.

  298. Spigette

    @Delphyne: “Calling a woman a liar, a thief and pro-rape, is sexist. These are insults that would never be flung at a man in the same position.”

    Women are every bit as capable as men of lying, thieving and supporting heinous behaviour when it suits them. Are you suggesting that any criticism of a woman or her views is by definition sexist?

    Lots of male politicians are accused of such villainy, many with perfect justification. It is infantilization to suggest that women cannot bear the same scrutiny. Even card-carrying pinko feminists like myself are far from perfect.

    It is hard to know how much of the info we get about Palin is true and how much is spin from one side or another. Do I think that Palin is getting far too much attention (positive and negative), and that this is largely because she is a woman? Absolutely. It is sickening. But no one deserves a free pass from any and all criticism.

  299. Miz Shoes

    From my own blog:

    In Nazi Germany, a Jew Catcher was a Jew who, in exchange for a little food, or a few months or years of life, would turn in their fellow Jews to be sent to the death camps. The most famous Jew Catcher was Stella Goldschlag.As inconceivable as her story may be for some, for others it was just survival… survival at the cost of her fellow man, but you know, survival. In her defense, she originally worked for the Nazis to save her parents. It didn’t work, they were eventually deported and killed, as was her husband. And she ultimately committed suicide in her old age, but you know…

    I believe that Sarah Palin is the feminist equivalent of Stella Goldschlag. She would use her position as a woman of power to prevent other women from ever getting that power. She would help overturn Roe vs Wade. Why do I believe this to be true? Her politics and her religion. Here is an excerpt from an essay about that religion.

    “Palin enjoys the enthusiastic backing of the Christian right because she is blindly obedient to the male hierarchy. She does not question. She submits and obeys. Her views on abortion and marriage, on the Middle East, on gays and the war against Islam are precooked. They are handed to her by men who claim to speak for God. And in power she would be the perfect conduit for an ideology that seeks, in the end, to eradicate individual moral choice and replace it with subservience to a terrifying Christian fascism.”

  300. panoptical

    other orange,

    First, thanks.

    As to the part about theft – I was referring in part to her keeping the Bridge to Nowhere money on behalf of her state, and in part to her practice of billing the State of Alaska for time she spent living at home while she was governor. In general, I consider any misappropriation of taxpayer money to be theft.

  301. other orange

    In general, I consider any misappropriation of taxpayer money to be theft.

    That’s arguable. The current bailout of private companies with taxpayer funds certainly feels like theft.

    And you’re welcome.

  302. panoptical

    delphyne,

    I’m sorry to have offended you. I’m not going to offer any defense aside from what other orange said. Although I believe what I said to be true, I will try to choose my words more carefully in the future.

    I just want to say though for the record though that I am not, nor have I ever been, a Democrat, liberal, or leftist. Although I share some points of agreement with liberals, I would characterize myself as a radical who falls almost entirely outside of the liberal-conservative political spectrum.

  303. jael

    if i might make an observation about Pailn/Obama’s intelligence/qualifications/suitability for the job (when did this become an Obama v Pailn match, anyway?)

    it would make no difference if both were intellectually below sub par; thought the tooth fairy was real and believed that modern medicine wasn’t going to heal your ill.

    democracy, rumour has it, allows the voting populace to select whatever individual they feel will best represent their desires, and act in their interest.

    now, irrespective of myriad of ethical issues that this raises (ie: manipulation, will they implement what you think etc etc), the nature of the US political system and other substantial and important philosophical concerns, the point of democracy is that it facilitates the voice of the masses.

    Whether or no the masses make good choices – ie: chose someone with enough intelligence or experience to do whatever – is inconsequential. US citizens have been given a choice. And, if the majority feels someone who has less ‘intelligence’ or ‘experience’ is who they want, then who the hell is anyone else to say no? Worse than that is to eliminate someone from running because we feel they do not have the attributes we desire. Feel free to convince others that their choice will not achieve what they want, but neither intelligence nor experience are necessary attributes for someone to run for office. I’m not saying their not attributes that you need when you’re IN office – but the level of intellegence/experience etc needed is for the voting public to chose.

    Otherwise, you start the slippery slope of “selection and suitability” : if you need to have X, Y, Z attributes to play the political game, you want to be really careful who starts choosing the attributes. I’d bet that the attributes people want to see in their representatives are as varied as the social and political opinions of Americans.

    (I mean, if we were choosing attributes, personally, I’d say anyone who wants power is off the list, and only those who don’t want it should be allowed into any political office. Intelligence, experience, social class or income be damned.)

  304. other orange

    Jael, I understand your point and in some ways I agree- no, we should not be about holding people back from their potential; and yes, of course, traditional (and patriarchal) standards have always been held up to disqualify people who didn’t fit that standard.

    But I hardly think we’re in a position of enough power to “eliminate” someone from the running. All we can do is, just as you say, try to discuss and clarify our beliefs and attempt to convince others of their merit.

    (And if we’re picking attributes, I’d like a pro-choice, pro-peace, pro-environment, pro-civil rights, pro-working families woman, please !)

  305. jael

    oo – I concur entirly. I just thought I’d put it out there – There are so strongly felt and worded responses in here. Yet we’re talking about Palin’s selection to run, not her actual election. I just think that needs to be kept in mind.

    Ok. Enough politics for me, or my head will explode with the circular nature of it all. Be happy, people.

  306. jael

    damn. I hit balme before spellcheck. Sorry, team.

  307. jami

    my “bias”, soopermouse? fox news has apparently given you the impression that i’m not allowed an opinion unless i pretend that it’s equally valid to value killing random middle eastern people over insuring people’s access to health care.

    how unfortunate.

    and now, like sarah palin and ann coulter, i shall ignore you, republican troll.

  308. panoptical

    I’m almost scared to start this thread going again, but I just saw Ralph Nader call out Bill Maher for his anti-Palin sexism. Maher called Palin a “bimbo” and Nader jumped down his throat, saying that it was sexist and that Joe Biden doesn’t face any kind of attacks in the media despite, for example, his rabid support for the drug war. Of course, the moment was ruined as soon as Maher started talking again.

  309. other orange

    Oh, Nader.

    I remember meeting him during his 2000 campaign- my mother and I catered his stop in my hometown. He came over to thank us and wanted to shake our hands. It’s difficult for my mom to shake hands firmly because of her arthritis, so Nader made his handshake incredibly gentle. People who are kind to my mother earn points with me.

    Nader’s not perfect by any stretch, but he does actually seem to be trying for a better world. Interestingly, too (at least to me) he was an Arab-American candidate (his family’s from Lebanon) and actually speaks Arabic. I’m surprised that’s never been held against him by our sick media; but it’s probably only because most people don’t know it.

    I’m not that surprised (just very, very pleased) that he would stand up against a sexist attack- on anybody. That’s the kind of self-policing we need from liberal men.

  310. jami

    panoptical, the thing about palin is she thinks sexism doesn’t exist. no one is calling her sugar tits or bimbo because no one ever does that. that doesn’t exist, see? la la la. no patriarchy here.

    but good for nader anyway. i’d be sorry about my 2000 vote for him if i lived in florida, but my vote was a throwaway to the electrical college.

  311. Mooska

    Assuming pretty much everyone on this thread would self-identify as feminists, I’m surprised (as was someone else upthread) that more is not being made of Palin’s pro-war stance. Women suffer disproportionately from war as it’s fought today, whether it’s being bombed, shot, raped, or simply further oppressed.

    A million dead Iraqis and counting, and Palin not only thinks it’s God’s will to prolong that war, but has apparently said she’d be prepared to nuke Russia. (And McCain has talked of 100 years of war in Iraq.)

    War, and particulary modern warfare as practised by the US, UK etc, kills and maims thousands upon thousands of women and their children. It causes them untold suffering. OK, these are mostly poor, brown and far away. We don’t *have* to pay them any attention; their suffering does not directly impinge on our lives. But I don’t think we can call ourselves feminists, or even decent human beings, unless we take them into account.

    Voting for a pro-war party may not ‘kill’ America. America will survive four years of McCain/Palin. But hundreds of thousands of foreign women will not.

  312. saltyC

    If there were an anti-war party, I’d vote for them.

    Oh yeah, there is, and I am: McKinney/Clemente

  313. Mooska

    Good on ya, SaltyC. Sadly, we hear virtually nothing about McKinney’s campaign here in Blighty, thanks to our patriarchy-lapdog meejah.

  314. Lissa

    I agree, Mooska. We are part of a global community. Whatever one’s ideas about Sarah Palin (and I do not find her remotely “feminist” and I challenge the notion that Mary Daly would find her a feminist! On the contrary! She is tokenism and a painted bird at best!!), it is troubling to listen to her paint the world in such broad strokes. There is no evidence of nuanced thinking. It is merely “us v. them.” She represents a culture of fear of “other.” We are not just U.S. feminists or Canadian feminists and it’s not just about our abortion rights or our economy.

    I encourage everyone to read the blogs of our sisters of color, and if you find yourself getting defensive and angry – that’s okay. Just keep reading and keep listening. The P wants us to fight amongst each other.

    “If you have come here to help me, then you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together.” -Lilla Watson

  315. Rachael

    Greetings from Alaska!

    I can’t speak for the entire state, but I can tell you that I don’t support Governor Palin, and I’ve spoken to other Alaskans who agree with me when I say that her positions on things such as abortion and the Iraq war are downright scary. We’re embarrassed at the attention Alaska’s getting–first from Senator Ted Stevens, and now Governor Palin. Meanwhile, the good candidate from Alaska (Mike Gravel, who’s not even in the race anymore) was barely mentioned by the media.

    It’s true that while Governor Palin didn’t directly force victims to pay for their own rape kits, but the fact remains that she never actually did anything about the matter–and as mayor, even if she wasn’t in charge of setting up the budget, she could have at least spoken up about it. She didn’t. And sometimes, silence is as loud as words.

    The most she said on the issue was, “The entire notion of making a victim of a crime pay for anything is crazy.” Well, obviously it’s wrong. To say it wasn’t would be political suicide. But the fact remains that she did nothing. She could easily have placed pressure on the chief of police who rearranged the budget so that “taxpayers” would no longer pay for a victim’s rape kit. Heck, she fired the last chief of police and hired this one!

    Even if that wasn’t the case, I just don’t agree with her positions. And I wouldn’t vote for John McCain if he picked Mike Gravel himself as Vice President.

  316. soopermouse

    There you go. I have seen the day when spreading smears about a woman is done at IBTP

    1. Palin is not a creationist. All she said was that she was open to the debate happening in schools, and that she did not even support ID being taught.

    2. No, neither Palin nor Wasilla billed rape victims for the rape kits. There is not een an utter lack of evidence about it, BUT it turns out that the city of Wasilla paid for said rape kits. behold

    “Lauree Hugonin, Director, Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault (ANDVSA) noted that “billings have not come from police agencies but have come from hospitals.” Trisha Gentle, Executive Director, Council on Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault noted that police departments were willing to pay for the exams, but that it was an internal decision on the part of the hospital as to who pays the hospital bill.”
    It is also true that protective mechanisms were in place in Alaska that would have picked up the cost of such kits, even if State law had not changed in 2000.
    The State of Alaska Violent Crimes Compensation Board (VCCB) was “was established in 1971 by the Alaskan Legislature to help bring financial relief to innocent victims of violent crimes in Alaska.”
    Among the things the VCCB would pay for are the medical bills of victims of violent crimes (including sexual assaults), counseling, and transportation to medical and counseling services.

    So thank you for the smear. Amazing

    3. What Palin said was that she prays that what America does in Iraq is God’s will. Hopefully I do not need to translate that, do I?

    But the point has been made. Patriarchy is bad unless it’s those bad women who don’t agree with you. They deserve all the shit that can be thrown a them. And then more.
    Fucking disgusting, if you ask me.

  317. jezebella

    soopertool, you lost. go home.

  318. Noshoes

    I miss Twisty. She makes us love her, then she leaves us. Sigh.

    My birthday was November 4 and I got a very nice birthday present. My heart swelled hugely in my chest as CNN projected that he had won, and I actually cried (along with most of the other women I know and a few men) during his acceptance speech. Is Obama going to change everything? He already has, baby.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>