«

»

Jun 21 2009

Spinster aunt longs to bathe lobe

Ever since the Lightning Strike of Aught Nine took out my radio tower and my satellite and the computer running the missile silos I have aimed at various undisclosed megatheocorporatocratic installations, I’ve been out of the loop.

I just heard that David Letterman told a tasteless joke about Willow Palin getting knocked up. I don’t know what the joke was. But it has inspired a blotz-ton of Internetian (rhymes with “Venetian”) backlashing. Some people are in a lather, demanding that Letterman be fired. Some people are saying, “Letterman was nice to that crazy stalker lady, so obviously he’s a good guy and didn’t mean anything by it.” Some people are saying, “So what if his joke was a little sexist? Don’t tell me what jokes are off-limits, you handwringing old cunt.”

This woman, Jan Tessier, observes some feminist outrage, takes exception to the radicalism, and declares that David Letterman is the real feminist. That’s right: sensitive, compassionate David Letterman is late-nite TV’s Lone Voice of the Feminist Revolution. He apparently embodies the principles of Tessier’s personal feminist heroes Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinam [sic].

Tessier, who — I bet you didn’t know this — has been put in charge of awarding True Feminist Badges to male talk show hosts — is reacting to the remarks of Amy Siskind.

Siskind, writing at HuffPo, has justifiably had it up to here with sex-based joke buttism and the culturally-embedded misogyny that inspires it.

Jan Tessier has read Siskind’s piece, which piece basically says “Hey, media knobs! Critique public figures on the issues, not on their Receptacle2K-compliance.”

Based on Siskind’s assertion that misogyny directed at icky antifeminist women is still misogyny, Tessier has no choice but to designate Amy Siskind a fake feminist. According to this reasoning, women who have been most severely compromised by oppressive patriarchal mores — the collaboratrices — are just asking for it. Tessier feels that it’s perfectly decent of Letterman to make jokes about teen sluts because — and this statement is remarkable in its stark raving lunacy — “there is absolutely no evidence that he hates women.”

Siskind, Tessier avers, is full of shit for maintaining that the media ought to put a sock in it already with the antifeminist one-liners about public women, even when the women in question are themselves antifeminists, like California beauty queen Carrie Prejean. According to Tessier, an “empty-headed” homophobic beauty queen is fair game for boob-job jokes. “That isn’t sexism,” she writes. “That’s comedy.”

What Tessier fails to grasp is that mocking members of oppressed classes simply because they exhibit the characteristics of their oppression is pretty fucking vulgar. Why did Prejean get her despised boob-job in the first place, Jan Tessier? For her health? No, Jan Tessier. The poor deluded kid enboobified herself in order to appease her oppressor, and absorbed homophobic messages for the same reason. The whole fucking system is homophobic and loves huge tits. What’s the big surprise? Mocking women for getting boob jobs is juvenile and unsophisticated. What needs mocking is the system that requires the boob jobs.

As to whether Letterman should be fired, well hell yeah. Of course, I say that about all the old white dudes.

Letterman has apologized, and naturally it’s a classic celebrity non-apology. He claims that when he told the joke he thought he was telling it about the 18-year-old Palin daughter, not the 14-year-old, which apparently makes all the difference.

I smell a Ditwuss!

Well, one thing’s for sure. Whenever an old influential white dude like Letterman cracks wise on national TV about the sluttiness of a teenage girl, no discourse gets enbiggened. No disconsolate soul grasping for Truth and Beauty in the dank subumbra of oppression is enlightened. No tacos are garnished with fresh pico de gallo, and no lobes are bathed in fancy, bubbly happiness.

I mention the bathing of lobes because the permutations of what may and may not be considered feminism, regarding this Letterman/Palin business, are truly lobe-blowing, and I don’t have to tell you, the veteran Blamer, how messy the post-lobe-blow wreckage can be, with its waxy yellow build-up, broken glass, and mountains of empty Cool Whip tubs.

202 comments

2 pings

  1. Shopstewardess

    Deconstructing the details of Jan Tessier’s article would take more time and patience than I have. But the overall tone is that of someone who thinks “politics” means only “party politics” – her argument fails because she is constraining herself to a partial view of the patriarchy.

    Perhaps I’m too familiar with the Tessier way of arguing for it to blow my lobes, but the contents of this link alongside Amy Siskind’s piece on HuffPo certainly left them needing a good scrubbing out -
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vicki-iovine/girlfriends-guide-to-very_b_217876.html

  2. Denise

    Agreed. I was very annoyed at the ostensibly feminist Pandagon for arguing that for a feminist or a liberal to say that the joke was sexist is to pander to the Republican “frame”. Apparently we can’t speak the truth if a Republican is saying it too, especially when the Republican is being disingenuous.

    Making fun of a woman because she had sex is sexist, and I’m not sorry to say it. I don’t care how anti-feminist, hypocritical, or in-the-public-eye the woman is. Making fun of a woman for having sex is buying into the other side’s “frame” much more than refraining from criticizing sexism is.

  3. panoptical

    The part of this issue that seems to have eluded the mass media is that this problem started long before Letterman made the comment about whatever Palin it was he was mocking. Letterman regularly lets go barrage after pointless barrage of odiously misogynistic comments about female public figures and no one bats an eye. Perhaps ten years from now he’ll grow tired of Monica Lewinsky jokes, but so far it doesn’t seem to have happened.

    The reason he and other liberal dude comedians get away with this stuff is that the left in this country is highly staked in being able to use satire and comedy to get their points across (which is why Comedy Central is where so many young liberal dudes get their news these days) and so they’re unwilling to censure comedians when they step out of line. Letterman isn’t even the worst of them – don’t get me started on that thrice-damned pestilential smarmy pile of used toilet paper Bill Maher and his constant vomit of women-hating vitriol.

    And the result of giving comedians a pass on misogyny is that it gets everyone real comfortable with hearing sexist jokes, so that you get arguments like “well if it’s okay for Letterman to make sexist jokes about Hillary, then surely it’s okay for Letterman to make sexist jokes about the Palins.” I mean, it certainly is a bizarre double standard that the right calls comedians on their misogyny while the left just lets it go, but everyone’s focusing on the wrong side of that double standard. Like, wouldn’t you expect that maybe somewhere on the left someone might one day be struck by the wild notion that maybe all the sexist jokes actually weren’t okay to begin with?

  4. ruby

    The Palin interview on the Today show was the first time I heard Ms Palin speak and heartily agreed with her about anything. Of course, before I saw the interview I heard over and over that she came across as a wack job. Believe me – I have no love for Palin, but for the first time, when speaking about the Letterman joke and others like it, she actually made sense and almost sounded like a feminist. I know, I know…

  5. hero

    But does it have to come into your own house before you’re angry? Lipstick-on-a-pitbull woman should also be playing both sides–going after Letterman or who(m)ever when woman-hating jokes are uttered, whatever the political assumptions of the victim–not that that means either Willow or Bristol (who LET those names be legal?) agrees with mum by default. Nasty business, this patriarchy.

  6. humanbein

    panoptical:

    Letterman isn’t even the worst of them – don’t get me started on that thrice-damned pestilential smarmy pile of used toilet paper Bill Maher and his constant vomit of women-hating vitriol.

    I can’t stand that mug.

  7. yttik

    I actually like Sarah Palin, but who is being targeted is completely irrelevant. When sexism and misogyny are being employed, we are all the intended targets.

  8. Rikibeth

    I actually thought the apology was pretty good, once he got past the “I totally meant it to be about Bristol, who’s 100% legal and not 14″ part and into the “but you know what, it doesn’t matter if I meant it to be Bristol, ’cause it was a lousy joke anyway, my bad.”

    I’d like to think that this means he’ll think better of making slut-shaming jokes in the future. I’d LIKE to think it, but I’m not exactly holding my breath, either.

  9. Oaktown Girl

    yttik – with the understanding that everybody has at least some good qualities, I’m curious to know what are the things you like about Sarah Palin. My list of reasons not to like her is very long, and I’m not opposed to trying to even out the balance sheet a little if you can give me some ideas.

  10. speedbudget

    The whole fucking system is homophobic and loves huge tits.

    This goes up along with my Savage Death Island plaque as soon as the banks approve my short sale.

    You all are invited.

  11. PandanCat

    Emboobified. It’s my new favorite word.

  12. Kit

    A comment at Media Matters details all the ‘jokes’ that are comparable or worse that were made by Jay Leno, Conan and others that were never even commented upon. This is manufactured outrage by the ‘right’ and I think that validating the line of reasoning is toolish behavior. No offense intended since I think calling out all misogynistic jokes and behavior is important but the decisions about what is over the line are not happening in a vacuum. They think Dave’s a lefty so they attacked him.

    http://mediamatters.org/columns/200906170036#504301

  13. yttik

    I don’t want to divert this thread into a discussion of Palin’s politics because really who she is is completely irrelevant to whether or not it is justified to use sexist attacks against her. She’s female, when comedians and pundits attack her along gender lines, they are attacking us all. When Palin is dehumanized for being a woman, we are all being sent a message. They don’t call Newt Gingrinch a slut or mock his intelligence. That’s because this isn’t about politics, it’s about being female.

    But a couple of reasons I like Palin is because she appointed a pro-choice, female, former board member of Planned Parenthood to the Alaska Supreme Court. She taxed the oil companies and gave the people a rebate to help compensate them for increased energy prices. She increased funding for education and children’s health care. She has instituted a plan to take Alaska off the grid and make it energy independent thru wind, solar, and water within the next few years.

  14. Jill

    And she charges rape victims for their rape kits. Nice.

  15. Gayle

    “They think Dave’s a lefty so they attacked him.”

    Why should I care if the response was manufactured by the right or the left?

    I’m just happy there was a response. Finally. Although, if what you write is true, feminists should have been leading the charge.

  16. Jill

    “They think Dave’s a lefty so they attacked him. “

    I can’t stand those talk shows so I never watch’em, but I never meant to imply Letterman is worse than the rest of the pack. As I said in the post, they should all be fired. And not just because they’re misogynists, but because they’re not funny.

    Although, as the advanced blamer knows, lefty dudes are often the worst pornsick pigs.

  17. yttik

    “And she charges rape victims for their rape kits. Nice.”

    Or perhaps this is a manufactured myth, a piece of political propaganda designed to trigger people emotionally and divide women.

    We’ve never found an actual Wasilla rape victim who was billed for a rape kit. The current Wasilla chief of police, Angela Long, made this statement:

    “A review of files and case reports within the Wasilla Police Department has found no record of sexual assault victims being billed for forensic exams. State law AS 18.68.040, which was effective August 12, 2000, would have prohibited any such billings after that date.”

  18. Jill

    The billings were prohibited after August, 2000, but not before. Check this out.

    The interesting thing about the $152 spent during that 6-month time period (there were probably 5 sexual assaults reported during that period) is that it was not even enough to cover a single rape kit, using the $300-$1,200 range given by the original Frontiersman article.

  19. yttik

    Carrie Perjean is not responsible for the state of gay rights in this country, Nancy Pelosi is not singlehandedly responsible for torture and war, and Sarah Palin did not invent the rape culture. It concerns me when we find a woman to dump all the blame on, a beauty queen, or a former mayor of a town of 7000, because that is pure patriarchy at work.

    Palin has stated over and over again that she absolutely does not support billing rape victims for exams. The press, the media, the political machines, have never been able to find an actual victim in Wasilla who was billed. Regardless, the state law was changed in 2000. But the facts really don’t matter when we have a designated target to direct all our outrage at. It’s misogyny, and it sells well in this country.

  20. Unree

    I’m surprised you’re repeating the rape kit story, Jill. It’s a partisan smear, amply debunked. Check the Reclusive Lefist links. The only part of the story that’s true is the part that applies to lots of other towns and states: Dumbass police-bureaucrats all over the country think they might as well get someone else (a health insurer, usually) to pay the examination bill.

  21. Jezebella

    Oh, ffs, Sarah Palin is a tool of the patriarchy. If you like her, you like her, fine, but don’t ignore her crimes against womanity. For example, she calls herself a “hard-core pro-lifer” and that puts her on my shit list right from the get-go.

  22. birkwearingblamer

    Palin is a tool of the patriarchy. She was clearly unqualified. She has a journalism degree granted after attending several (three?) different colleges. There were several qualified Republican women that could have been the VP candidate. Her nomination was a mockery and an insult to women who have worked so hard to achieve real accomplishments and advance by their own merit. If Palin had any class, she’s disappear from the public view and move on with her life.

  23. yttik

    “If Palin had any class, she’s disappear from the public view and move on with her life.”

    In other words, she’d sit down, shut up, and start acting like a woman more acceptable to the patriarchy.

  24. birkwearingblamer

    She could get some real credentials and become qualified for a higher position, instead of expecting to be promoted without higher education and real experience.

  25. no pasaran

    “Her (Palin’s) nomination was a mockery and an insult to women who have worked so hard to achieve real accomplishments and advance by their own merit.”

    So being a governor of a state (presently one of only SEVEN female governors in this whole country) is not an accomplishment?

  26. Jezebella

    Gosh, yes, yttik, that’s *exactly* what birkwearingblamer is promoting: that all women sit down and shut up. Except, well, No, that’s not it at all. Sarah Palin needs to learn a thing or twelve-thousand things in order to do a competent job as an elected official. She’s not smart. She’s not well-educated. She has no empathy. She’s not a feminist. You wanna hang with her, by all means, book a helicopter and go murder some wolves with her. Booyaa.

  27. polly sytrene

    One does not have to like Sarah Palin or think she’s feminist though to think that misogynist abuse has been directed at her and her family. Misogynist abuse can still be directed at women you don’t like.

    And FWIW here in Eng-er-land, I’m thinking – the yanks elected Dubya(well only the second time properly but still).

  28. Jezebella

    What’s your point, Polly? Not all of us voted for Dubya, you know.

    I’m not disagreeing that misogynist “jokes” are inappropriate no matter the target, by any means.

  29. Oaktown Girl

    the yanks elected Dubya(well only the second time properly but still).

    Sadly, not even close to true. 2004 was stolen just as much as 2000. Only difference was ground zero was Ohio.

  30. Shabnam

    Polly’s point was that the American public have twice voted in the same underqualified, not terribly bright rich white man for their highest office. In the 80′s there was Reagan. Why are dumb Republican men to be tolerated but not women?

    The best measure for a lack of discrimination is when mediocre women/ minorities (any traditionally underprivileged group) are promoted and make it to the top and are treated with respect, just like white males.

  31. Jezebella

    What makes you think this crowd has any tolerance for dumb Republican men??

  32. Jill

    OK, if Palin didn’t advocate billing rape victims for rape kits, I’m for admitting my research is faulty. But not making women pay for their own rape kits is hardly the deal-breaking quality one looks for in a feminist elected official.

    But that’s all sort of off-topic. Nobody is arguing that Palin should be given extra misogyny because she’s right-wing, rape kits or no rape kits. Just the opposite. But that doesn’t mean that a radical feminist critique of her public persona and political views cannot include the assertion that she’s an uneducated antifeminist parochial godbag tool.

  33. wiggles

    Her pick of MRA and spousal rape advocate Wayne Ross for AK attorney general also puts quite the sizable dent in whatever feminist cred an anti-choicer could possibly have.
    http://community.adn.com/node/140395
    I’ll defend her from misogynist attacks whenever they come up, but she’s no feminist.

  34. Shabnam

    Jez, this crowd, I’m sure, doesn’t, but Palin was not chosen by `this crowd’ to be Vice Presidential candidate. One can equally ask why the Republican Party didn’t select a more highly educated male Presidential candidate for 2000.

  35. RKMK

    Via Dr. Socks:

    Consider, for example, the rape kit smear. It’s been thoroughly debunked, of course, but the damage it did was tremendous. And that’s damage it was designed to do. The rape kit smear was pushed by the Obama campaign itself, with conference calls to reporters urging them to follow the story. It was expressly designed to alienate women voters in particular; after all, there are few issues more raw for women than sexual violence. The Obama camp’s behavior in perpetrating that smear reminds me of their similar role in the RFK smear: both were profoundly cynical, morally bankrupt attempts to exploit people’s deepest fears.

    Just sayin.

    In related news, I’m thrilled the status quo has been tossed over at NOW, and the incoming team is far less likely to play nice with Obama’s roving band of misogynist asshats.

  36. ambivalent academic

    OK I think I get it but can someone please issue a point of clarification? – my snot-clogged synapses are too slow get there without blowing a lobe this afternoon.

    Slut-shaming of women = bad (I think we can all agree for obvious reasons)
    Making jokes about women = misogynist
    Making jokes about anti-feminist women = misogynist and anti-feminist
    Making jokes about female “tools of the patriarchy” = same as above right?

    Because I’m equating female tools of the patriarchy with anti-feminist women. Did I miss something? (It’s entirely possible that I did – like I said I’m only operating on about half a brain right now.) Because we do that here all the time (and I’ll be the first to admit that I like it).

  37. ambivalent academic

    Argh. Please forgive the appalling grammar in the previous comment. I’ll be back on form in a couple’a days I promise.

  38. tinfoil hattie

    Well, I won’t agree with “uneducated,” and I don’t know about “godbag.” I don’t like Palin because she represents Republican values, 99% of which I disagree with. She is “pro-life” yet appointed a pro-choice appellate judge. She said she believes in educating people about birth control and advocating abstinence. The latter is pure horseshit, but she’s not anti- birth control. She actually said she’s a good example of someone who should have taught her daughter better about birth control.

    I think she’s given a really unfair time of it.

  39. Jill

    “I think she’s given a really unfair time of it.”

    Which is the entire point of this post!

  40. Caroline

    It is important to understand the context of Governor Palin’s pick for the Alaska Supreme Court before she is given too much credit by feminists. By some official process or another, the governor is given a list of names to choose from by the Judicial Council, a group of lawyers, officials and other judges. Governor Palin was given two names from which to choose; a pro-choice woman and an environmentalist man (forgive me for essentializing, I know both candidates had much more to offer than these simple characterizations). In Alaska, resource development trumps social issues for political importance. The Alaska Supreme Court will play a much larger role in environmental issues than it will in social issues in Alaska, so the governor was better able to advance her pro-development policies by rejecting a greenie judge. I hope this helps frame her choice. As an Alaskan, I’ve been following the Palin story long before she was governor. While I can attest that she is exceptional in many ways, her rise to her current stardom cannot be understood without a good understanding of Alaska politics. Just to stay on the topic of the post, I agree that despite Palin’s anti-feminist credentials she is entitled to the full support of feminists when she happens to stumble on a good idea. As hard as it might be to agree with my governor, I remember that even a broken clock is right twice a day. This whole fiasco has been good for the sisterhood, really. Sarah Palin has the ridiculous ability to get in the news all the time, and the fact that she has been able to turn the mainstream dialogue toward what levels of misogyny are acceptable is good for the cause.

  41. nails

    I actually thought his appology was one of the better ones I have seen. Especially the part about how his intent does not matter, the impact does. Usually you get a “I am sorry if I offended anyone, the intent was not hurtful” appology that makes everyone high five and agree that unless the joke teller deems the joke to be sexist or racist it just isn’t. That is a crazy and popular meme that I don’t understand and gets recycled every time an offensive joke is given this much attention, but the appology does admit the fault so that line of thinking flies right out the window. Letterman’s appology is being talked about poorly by the other liberal dude comics so it seems to me like he did a pretty good job. Everyone is talking about how stupid it is for him to be sorry for making a mistake and causing hurt.

    I agree that the discussion of the rampant misogynist jokes does not seem to happen and should, but this seems to have some unique components to it that makes for a slightly different outcome than the regular offensive joke outrage stories.

  42. B. Dagger Lee

    True confession: Against my will, I kinda like Gov’ner Palin when she’s just sitting around yakking. She reminds me of some conservative women I knew growing up who were pretty kickass in spite of their reprehensible politics, and used to get pretty bawdy when they got drunk at the local country club. And I think she’s pretty smart, though ignorant. I’d prefer her over Tom Fucking Delay or George Bush any day.

    David Letterman can kiss my fat dyke ass.

  43. Spiders

    It’s not too bloody feminist to toss around accusations of ‘uneducated’ in a culture which has historically limited women’s access to it. Just sayin’.

  44. Jezebella

    Sarah Palin grew up in middle-class whitey America, and she’s all of 45 years old. She’s had plenty of access to education. It’s not an accusation, it’s a fact. She’s also studiously avoided any manner of self-education in the years since her BA. It’s almost like she’s willfully ignorant. I want my elected officials to be educated, whether that means by academia or self-study.

  45. megankay

    “She’s also studiously avoided any manner of self-education in the years since her BA.”

    What do you mean by this? That she didn’t go on to grad school? Yes, I guess that’s a fact. How in the world would you know anything about her self-education?

  46. birkwearingblamer

    What’s with the nationalism? As the other state delegates say to Texans at the political conventions, can you keep your regionalism your big, ugly hats?

    BDL, Sarah Palin would probably be a hoot to have a few drinks with,but I don’t want her second in command of my country.

  47. Oaktown Girl

    nails – the intent was not hurtful” apology that makes everyone high five and agree that unless the joke teller deems the joke to be sexist or racist it just isn’t.

    Funny you should bring this up today and state it so well. Thank you very, very much. I really needed to hear that tonight. I just ran up against exactly that situation from someone who asserted his comment by definition couldn’t be sexist because his intent was pure. But if anyone was offended, well he’s sorry. It was a very depressing end to a very difficult day, and your saying what you said helps affirm that no, I’m not crazy…or stupid (which I knew, but it’s nice to be validated when you’re feeling very alone).

  48. denelian

    RKMK – i don’t know if you are defending Palin, are just decrying the way politics has been corrupted…

    but, asuming that you are defending Palin – you are saying that (*gasp*) some PR people in Obama’s camp “pushed” the story that it is possible Palin did something that was “wrong” to make voters dislike her in an emotional response?
    because, and this does not mean that i agree with the Obama camp doing so, if they did – because if you are saying that, that is SOME NERVE you are showing there, protesting the dog-whistles of the left

    *if* that is what happened, with some PR people pushing a not-true story just to get people pissed at Palin (and is it? i did not hear about the “rape-kit-issue” until after the election was over; when did it start? i really have no clue when it started, i had assumed that the point of the story and media time given to it was along the lines “oh, good, we missed that bullet”, ya know?) then yeah, it’s totally fucked up. and there is not any excuse for it at all. and should be a pointed reminder to politicians to, especially those on the right knock it off already with the racist sexist dog whistles – because when *you* use them, you give your opponent reason to use them as well.

    (i don’t mean that dirty campaigns are good, or even “ok”, if they are done in response to mud-flinging from the other side. i am saying that flinging mud? means that you voluntarily give up your moral high ground and practically beg your opponent to act in a like manner. it is a rare person, indeed, who can resist that sort of challenge. when someone talks shit about me, i know that my first response is always to talk shit back – it takes a concerted effort on my part to not do so. and i’m not under the pressuer of the entire world wanting to hear about the shit i can fling…)

  49. tinfoil hattie

    denelian, I think the point is that it wasn’t, and isn’t, only the people on the so-called “left” who employ misogyny and racism to make a point. It’s everyone, because we live in the wonderful world of patriarchy.

    And Jill, I know the point of this post is that Palin’s been given an unfair time of it – but I am not talking only about your usual run-of-the-mill sexism and woman-hate. I’m saying facts about her have been distorted. And I’m not even talking about the photoshops of her bikini-clad, gun-totin’ self.

  50. Spiders

    “I want my elected officials to be educated, whether that means by academia or self-study.”
    So you want them to be from middle class whitey america?

  51. Gayle

    denelian,

    You used a heck of a lot of words to say “she started it.” For the record, she didn’t. The rape kit story came out shortly after Palin was placed on the ticket. I don’t know how you could have missed it.

    Obama’s team was flinging a hell of a lot of mud well before the GE began. But having the corporate media as well as new media firmly on his side, he didn’t face the blow back his competitors did.

  52. speedbudget

    Spiders, I think the point is that some people want the people in charge of the country to be smarter than they are. Wallowing in ignorance and being proud of that is not good.

    It took Sarah Palin three or more tries to graduate college, and then it was from a community-type school. I’m not saying community colleges are bad, but the fact is, they’re easier than regular universities or colleges and are generally used as jumping-off points for people to get used to the level of academia that will be require of them when they do transfer to the state college or university.

    She couldn’t name one newspaper or magazine that she reads. Just a blithe “I read all of them.” Which is a cop out. It reminded me of the kid in class who is all “I have one of those” every time someone else talks about a new toy they got or something.

    The right tends to be proud of their ignorance. I Watched Jesus Camp and it was disturbing how absolutely, fundamentally proud those people were to be in complete ignorance of basic biology, geology, and history. I know those were the extreme, but I’ve seen people around here where I live, usually Repuglican red necks, go on and on about how proud they are that they never got an education. Palin herself demonstrated a severe lack of geographical or historical knowledge throughout the campaign, but I think her lack of education was a feature, not a bug, for the right.

    Can’t have those wimminz thinkin too hard. Might make their lady-bits go rotten.

  53. Jezebella

    Gosh, YES, Spiders, that’s EXACTLY what I want! How did you know? Are you psychic? I bow to your powers of perception.

    Ass.

  54. yttik

    “Sarah Palin needs to learn a thing or twelve-thousand things in order to do a competent job as an elected official. She’s not smart. She’s not well-educated. She has no empathy. She’s not a feminist.”

    Right. Than she will be smart, empathetic, feminist, and competent, like all our other delightful politicians. Hey, maybe someday she’ll be good enough to join this enlightened group of elected officials? Ya think?

    Obviously the playing field is incredibly uneven. All we demand from
    women is complete perfection in every area. For male politicians, well, if you get caught toe tapping in the bathroom or hiding cash in the freezer, be forewarned, we might scold you and crack a few jokes. Indictments can be a bit of stumbling block, but they won’t necessarily get you removed from office, so chin up! And hey, if you chose to invade a couple of small countries or torture a few thousand people, we understand. Shit happens and boys will be boys.

    Now, let’s begin going over the rules for being in Politics While Female, starting with your choice of shoes….

  55. pheenobarbidoll

    I always love it when my race/sex is some sort of aberration unworthy of even being considered when people talk about education.

    If you’re talking about education, it’s got to be all about the whitey doesn’t it? God knows they don’t get enough air time. And of course, men are the default too.

    Thanks.

  56. Jezebella

    “I want my elected officials to be educated, whether that means by academia or self-study.”
    ——————————
    So you want them to be from middle class whitey america?
    ———————————————————–

    So, Spiders, are you suggesting that only middle class white Americans are “educated”?

  57. Denise

    Making jokes about women = misogynist

    No. Women aren’t magically exempt from having jokes made about them. Neither are anti-feminist women nor tools of the patriarchy. Feminism isn’t anti-humor. We are (or should be) anti-slut-shaming-humor, no matter the political bent of said slut.

  58. jael

    Jez, you know that wasn’t what Spiders was saying; come on. I do think you both have a point; but how we define “learning” and “self education” seem to me to not be so helpful here.

    Sarah Palin has what – 5 kids? Even if the woman never picked up a book ever, there is incredible learning in raising 5 children (wether or no we agree with what the kids learnt, their value system or think that she “failed” with Bristol).

    That book learning is so highly valued and seen as “true” learning seems to me to devalue to incredible knowledge that is the product of human interaction, child raising, caring for the dying, etc etc.

    Speedbudget: “the right tends to be proud of their ignorance”.

    Sure, but I’ve met a hell of alot of people on the left who wave their ignorance around like banners. And resist with all force any attempt at broader learning. But more than that – I’m going to reiterate the above. Some of the best advice I have ever seen given about dealing with emotional upheaval; stress; family situations etc.. has been from bible believing, fundamentalist, stay at home, high school educated mothers. The wisdom they have shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand; as with all of us we package our insight with out ignorance. No group has a monopoly on learning, ignorance or pride.

    none of this necessarily pertains to Sarah Palin at all; but I think if we talk about “learning” being book learning and the type of learning that takes place in a structured situation, we’re dismissing all the learning that happens outside that context, most of which is more useful to our actual lives.

    And in the end, it’s the approach which devalued women’s contributions to society in the past (and today), “women’s work”/”women’s learning” is not “real” work/learning; we want to see proof of how you compete doing “real work/real learning”. We need to think way more broadly about learning and how its valued.

  59. incognotter

    The true test of a person’s knowledge is what they contribute. Has Sarah Palin contributed to the public discourse, whether intellectually or by common sense and life experience? If she has, the debate is about how much she has contributed and whether we think those are the right contributions for the office she holds/could hold. If she hasn’t, as far as I am concerned the discussion is over. She may be a good mother and a nice person but I require more of my elected officials. I require it of all elected officials, regardless of gender, and am almost always disappointed, but such is life.

    The attacks on Palin and her daughter are misogynist tripe, and I reject them. You will never hear me make a slut-shaming joke about Palin. But I do reserve the right to judge her qualifications for office as, you know, *a member of the electorate*. We need to be getting the many qualified women into office instead of arguing about whether it is anti-feminist to have standards.

  60. jael

    but that’s the problem with democracy, isn’t it? if the majority of people want someone who is not qualified, then they can have them. If we’re going to start instituting qualification requirements for leadership, what about morality or belief requirements? I mean – it’s just about having standards, isn’t it?

  61. Jezebella

    I VERY SPECIFICALLY said that learning could come from self-study OR academia. I repeat that in case anyone needs help with their reading comprehension. Let me clarify: by “self-study” I mean, reading, life experience, or any other way one might learn stuff. Raising five children can teach you a lot of stuff, but it won’t teach you how to run the United States of America. I’m not devaluing women’s work. I’m talking about the fucking job description of POTUS. Christ on a cracker.

    I refuse to condone voting for women just because they’re women, which seems to be yttik’s point: there are worse male politicians out there, so why not vote for Sarah? Well, there are plenty of female politicians out there that are worlds smarter and better-informed than Ms. Palin. So despite what the Republicans thought, I’m not voting with my vagina for all fellow vagina-bearers. As women, we can do better than that.

    Jael, you know perfectly well that Spiders intentionally misread my post, which is why I intentionally misread hers.

  62. Jezebella

    Well, jael, no one is advocating a change in who can run for office.

    There ARE people suggesting I should vote for Sarah Palin because she happens to have a vagina, and is no worse than many elected male politicians. As a voter, I have standards. I am only going to vote for someone who appears to be qualified for the job AND is running on a platform I agree with. Palin met neither standard. I am not obligated as a feminist to vote for a woman, any woman, just because she’s a woman.

    I agree with every single opinion I personally hold, but if I were running for POTUS, I wouldn’t vote for me. Because I’m not qualified. Dig?

  63. incognotter

    “but that’s the problem with democracy, isn’t it? if the majority of people want someone who is not qualified, then they can have them. If we’re going to start instituting qualification requirements for leadership, what about morality or belief requirements? I mean – it’s just about having standards, isn’t it?”

    Are you seriously telling us that we are *not allowed* to have standards because you think the majority of the electorate (in a country which isn’t yours, I believe) don’t want standards?

    Democracy is the process of *us*, the individual citizens, determining whether or not we believe Palin is qualified and whether or not we care. I claim the right to exercise my responsibilities as a citizen whether or not you find my actions personally convenient. Clear?

  64. birkwearingblamer

    I can’t resist the urge to be a history nerd here. The United States is a representative republic, as described by James Madison in the Federalist Papers.

    Benjamin Franklin emerged from the Constitutional Convention and telling another person that he had “[a] Republic, if you can keep it.” Ben Franklin was not educated at a university because he was the second son and his father could not afford to send him. He was self taught. He was one of the most influential men in early U.S. history and his pragmatism was invaluable in founding the government.

    We could use a female Ben Franklin now. I’m sure that such a woman is out there. Emily’s List has helped to elect many women.

  65. otoc

    WHAT?? Who here is telling anyone else to vote for Sarah Palin???????

  66. yttik

    I certainly don’t care who people vote for. But I would like to see people question the perceptions that the patriarchy spoon feeds us.

    There’s a reason the US has never had a woman president and why we only have 17% representation in congress. It’s because the field is not level and what we demand from female politicians is a bar so high, very few women can ever reach it. In fact when it comes to the presidency, no one ever has.

  67. Spiders

    Jez, I was kidding. Trying to inject levity. Guess I was the only one amused.

    She has a lot of kids doesn’t she? Palin I mean. That will definitely limit your time available for study, self or otherwise.
    I think I have a poor working class chip on my shoulder about education because I wince when I see or hear people using ‘uneducated’ as a slur.

  68. jael

    given the impact of us policy around the world, are you suggesting only us citizens should be allowed to comment on us politics, otter? really? otherwise; please, act any way you want; i think we’re parting ways only on the use of “i” , “we” and “all” – you act on whatever is important to you, and others can act on what’s important to them.

    jez, i’m curius – what would (necessarily) make you a good leader of the united states? it seems to me – as bikiwearingblamer has observed re franklin – also Lincoln with his 18 months of formal schooling – that attributes vary. Lots of experience, a small amount of experience, “different” experience (academia, anyone?); large education, little education; wealth, poverty: in the end the whole is a product. I’d really like to know what you perceive to be necessary (and exclusionary) attributes (including those that would disqualify yourself in such a case). I obviously need help with reading comprehension, as I didn’t understand “self-study” in the way you have explained it; thank you for you the explanation.

    And let me say it again: I’m not in anyway saying anyone should have voted for Sarah Palin (or Clinton, or Obama or anyone); truly I’m not; rather am coming at this from a construction of wisdom point of view. Perhaps discussing the attributes required of leaders, or our expectations of their qualifications without reference to Palin (or Clinton), might make the discussion more palatable.

    And last of all; what yttik said above – there is a reason certain patterns keep repeating themselves. Changing those patterns means challenging patriarchal structures we might have advantages as a result of.

  69. HazelStone

    I’m not condoning Letterman’s joke, but I wonder if satirizing women public figures over sexual-political hypocrisy would ever be considered OK by this crowd?

    I mean, as poorly handled and obnoxious as the “joke” was, it was intended to point out how ridiculous it is that the candidate of the right-wing “I want to police your sexuality” crowd has a daughter who is an unwed mother. I don’t find that objectionable, but it is a ripe target for satire. Is there a way to do so that is not anti-woman?

  70. Bird

    I will defend any woman from sexist attacks (even the Palins, Coulters, and Schaflys of the world). But that sure as hell doesn’t mean I have to agree with or vote for them. That certainly doesn’t send me scrambling to find the mote of feminism in Palin’s otherwise reprehensible political stance.

    No woman running for office anywhere deserves the misogynist shit we get for it, no matter her party affiliation or level of education. I’ve been on the receiving end as a candidate, and it’s hurtful to face those attacks. Sometimes they even threaten women candidates’ physical safety (I’ve had my tires slashed and anti-woman graffiti targeting me at my home).

    Still, I don’t think that obligates me to vote for a particular woman just because we share the same gender. I want to vote for a woman, but I want her to be someone who will actually stand up for progressive, feminist principles, and I want her to be qualified to do the job (whether that’s a degree or some serious self-education). I empathise with what any woman in politics faces, but that empathy doesn’t extend to betraying my beliefs at the ballot box.

    If we want women we feel we can genuinely support, we need to get out and put our time/energy/money behind women we actually want to see as leaders instead of voting for a woman who hates us because she happens to have a vagina. We need to support smart, capable, feminist women’s campaigns, and maybe even run ourselves. Yes, that doesn’t always mean those women get elected, but when it does happen, it’s incredibly satisfying to kick the patriarchy in the teeth.

  71. Spiders

    Hazelstone, I’m not sure it counts as satire when it’s directed at someone from an oppressed class. My understanding of satire is that it was intended to challenge the ruling or dominant classes only, although as a politician, I’m not sure where that leaves Palin.

  72. Bird

    Palin experiences both privilege and oppression, just like many women on this blog do. Women are an oppressed class, but most of us have other areas where we are oppressors. Such is the nature of life in a patriarchy.

    I believe that one can definitely challenge a woman who is part of the ruling/dominant class, but that said satire must challenge her areas of privilege, not her place in an oppressed class (womanhood). So one might play on her helicopter hunting habits safely but not comment on her “fuckability”.

  73. Nolabelfits

    I think I have a poor working class chip on my shoulder about education because I wince when I see or hear people using ‘uneducated’ as a slur.

    I agree here. Colleges and Universities are elitist institutions. I went to a very prestigious institution for a year and a half right out of high school,(on full financial aid) then dropped out. I was a “returning” student in my late thirties, finally graduating at 40. I returned to community college, and got my degree from a state uni. Does that make me “less than” intellectually than someone who did the four year run at an ivy league? I think not. My sister’s kid got accepted to a fancy university, but the reason he was able to go there was because they could afford it. Many highly qualified and motivated students do the community college/state uni route because their parent’s belong to the hard working middle classes. They earn “too much” to qualify for financial aid, yet don’t earn enough to actually pay for the high end universities. Thats where my daughters are. They could have been accepted to “better” colleges, but who wants to take on student loans and be 100K in debt at age 22? They chose to do the community college/transfer route instead. I see universities as institutions that perpetuate the class system here in America. And for the record, some of my classes at the community college were more enlightening than the ones I took at the prestigious university, or the state college I eventually graduated from.

  74. Spiders

    That’s pretty much my situation too, Nola. Finally getting a degree in my 40s after running away from an abusive home at fifteen, dropping out of school etc. My daughter and I are opting to go into debt for an education, just didn’t see another way really.

    I agree about community colleges too; I got halfway through a course at one of them before I decided to make the jump to uni instead, but it was an excellent preparation and in a lot of ways, the teachers there were better than some of the more privileged teachers I have at uni.

    Bird, that’s a good point. Trouble is when she is satirised for other stuff like say the hunting thing, the woman thing always seems to get in the way, for example that pic of her in the bikini.

  75. Jezebella

    Sometimes I forget that no matter who is in charge of the revolution, people with book-learnin’ get put up against the wall and shot. Left or right, everybody hates an egghead smartypants. It’s like fucking junior high, for ever, isn’t it?

  76. jael

    Jez, that’s your response? Come on.

  77. Nolabelfits

    Jez,

    I dont’ agree. Those of us who have not been to prestigious institutioins or have impressive degrees are shot down continually as uneducated. “Blue collar” “White Trash” “Ghetto” you name it. I have a ton of stuff that can identify me as “educated,” but I choose not to disclose it in ordinary everyday converastion. The result? I get treated as inferior. Its amazing how when I talk about what I have achieved people suddenly give me credibility. I say fuck all’ y’all. YOu can learn something from every single peron on this planet no matter what their age, gender, culture, ethnicity, social circumstance, whatever. Even Sarah Palin knows something you don’t know. The homeless guy swilling colt 45 in a bag knows something you don’t know. The problem is that knowledge is valued only when someone from a “higher” institution reports on it.

  78. Jezebella

    I never thought I’d see anti-intellectual swill come bubbling up here, of all places.

  79. Jezebella

    And let me just add, that judging an entire class of people (academically educated) by the behavior of a few is grade-a prejudice. So I WON’T say “fuck all y’all” because I DON’T judge people by their degrees, unlike you. I judge them by their behavior. Yours, I’m deeming assy. So YOU, Nolabelfits, I am returning the compliment: you can go fuck yourself sideways.

  80. denelian

    so, yeah, i was dancing around the “they started it” (not *she* started it, because it was started way before Palin was selected as McCain’s running mate). not excuse *any* of it. because i don’t

    i can’t explain why i didn’t hear about Palin and rape kits until after novemember – i had certainly heard about issues with rape kits in general before Nov, and right after she was announced as the VP candidate i did a lot of research on her – but i didn’t run into it, at least in a way that actually stuck that there was a media story about Palin supposidly charging women for rape kits. which isn’t to say the story wasn’t there, just that A) i didn’t hear about it and B) i had never heard anything before this post that even implied that the story came from the Obama camp.

    i always just assumed that the story conflated several actual facts – that it conflated the fact that Palin is *very* anti-choice and anti-woman, and the fact that Alaska has a *horrible* track record when it comes to rape.

    *shrug*. it seems like the sort of story that is meant to be “true” at an emotional level. and while that means that the story is, in fact, a lie – it is a *very* used, overused, tactic. look at the fact that so many people are still agitating to see Obama’s “real” Birth Cert! Obama wasn’t born outside the US, but the story is really that he “is different”, and that is true, so “truth” to some people becomes NOT “Obama is an america who isn’t white” but rather becomes “Obama isn’t an American”.

    does that make sense?

  81. delphyne

    I’ve never heard education being used as a reason not to elect someone, well not until Sarah Palin came on the scene.

    “Raising five children can teach you a lot of stuff, but it won’t teach you how to run the United States of America.”

    Yeah but being Governor of Alaska might give you a couple of pointers in the right direction. You don’t think she learned anything on that job? And anyway she was going to be VP not president. People really seem to be afraid that she might have ended up running the country.

    Is that what is required in leaders then – an advanced degree from Harvard or apparently they know nothing? It’s not like Yale and law school did George Bush much good in the executive stakes. I’m not suprised to see hideous classism on this blog mind you. Being anti-elitist isn’t the same as being anti-intellectual you know.

    I’m just thinking, Andrea Dworkin never graduated from Bennington, nor did she ever undertake an advanced degree. Maybe we should have kicked her out of the feminist movement. How dare an uneducated woman like that think she could be a feminist leader.

  82. delphyne

    I read Sarah Palin saying that her favourite author was C.S. Lewis. That’s hardly anti-intellectual.

  83. Jill

    But it’s really godbaggy.

  84. delphyne

    Yeah but it’s a shout-out to intellectual god-bags (and not trying to justify herself to sexists who will belittle her intellect or education). The point is she’s being accused of not being intellectual. CS Lewis is about as intellectual as you can get in that area unless you’re going to start reading St Thomas Aquinas.

  85. HazelStone

    “CS Lewis is about as intellectual as you can get in that area unless you’re going to start reading St Thomas Aquinas.”

    That’s sort of the problem, isn’t it?

    Also, many, many, many people bemoaned Dubya’s lack of education and intellectual curiosity when he was a candidate. Straight Cs and cheerleading at Yale isn’t much of a resume.This is not a Palin thing sui generis.

  86. Bird

    I would no more want an uneducated person to lead a nation than I would want someone with no qualifications performing brain surgery on me. In either case, lives are on the line and that person damn well better have some clue. That’s not elitist; that’s common sense.

    In my view, education and school (college, university) are NOT synonymous. But I do think that the anti-intellectualism that so frequently creeps into the electoral process is dangerous. We shouldn’t want to elect the person we want to have a beer with, but a lot of people vote that way because elections have become more like popularity contests than job interviews. The most recent US election was no exception–it’s just that the Democrats found the most charismatic candidate this time.

  87. delphyne

    Why is that the problem? Sorry I’m not following. CS Lewis is what Christian intellectuals read – he was a famous Christian apologist. Are you saying CS Lewis is for stupid people? First I’ve heard of it. He was an Oxford medievalist who aren’t normally famed for their lack of intellectual rigour.

    And it’s a sexist thing Hazel. People might have taken the piss out of Bush’s stupidity (he did have an education, he just didn’t make much use of it) but they never flat out said he was unqualified and that he shouldn’t be president.

  88. delphyne

    Why is that the problem? Sorry I’m not following. CS Lewis is what Christian intellectuals read – he was a famous Christian apologist. Are you saying CS Lewis is for stupid people? First I’ve heard of it. He was an Oxford medievalist who aren’t normally famed for their lack of intellectual rigour.

    And it’s a sexist thing Hazel. People might have taken the piss out of Bush’s stupidity (he did have an education, he just didn’t make much use of it) but they never flat out said he was unqualified and that he shouldn’t be president.

  89. delphyne

    We don’t know what Obama’s grades were at Columbia were. They’ve never been released.

  90. Jezebella

    Delphyne, plenty of people, including myself, believe Bush the Younger was unqualified and shouldn’t be president, despite his legacy Ivy degree. You may not have heard people saying it, but it was said, flat out and out loud.

  91. delphyne

    I’m pretty sure Bush would never have said he read CS Lewis. People would have been falling over themselves at his Xtian intellectualism if he had.

    Double standards. Shame you can’t see it.

  92. Nolabelfits

    Sorry Jez, for being an ass. I meant that universally, not specific to this group.

    But I stand by my assertion that many people are judged by what degrees they have and what schoolsl they went to. I’ve had conversations at work with people I have just met who within minutes are namedropping Princeton, Yale, etc. They do it with Frats and sororities as well in some parts of the country.

    Money is a huge factor in where someone gets to go to school. You may be able to get in, but if you can’t pay, you go somewhere else. Financial aid only covers so much.

    I found that the “dumbing down” of education existed at the university level as well. I was told my final research paper needed to be aimed at “my peers,” which meant I had to include sections that explained the basics of my topic. Since I was not writing the paper for newbies to the topic, I had to include a whole section I would have left out. The paper was limited to 30 pages, so I ended up having to dumb it down for a different audience instead of writing the in depth paper I wanted to write. I was told I could “futher explore the topic if I wanted to go on to the Masters Level.” What crap. Anyway, I’m done.

  93. Squiggy

    Nolabelfits, I don’t want you to fuck yourself, sideways or anyways. Come sit with me for a nice cup of tea. Or beer.

  94. jael

    jez; again – what does actually qualify someone to be president of the us? or are you more comfortable identifying the lack thereof? if so, what disqualifies you from being president? (given esp you’re going to have advisors in every area you might possibly need to deal with).

    HazleStone: Lewis is by no means unchallenging. There is rigor in every field; Christian apologetics and theology is no slouch area. That Lewis being regarded as an authority poses a problem for you says to me that your issue is more with Lewis’ different world view than with his capacity for intellectualism. You can be an intellectual in an arsehole area; doesn’t make you not an intellectual.

  95. Jezebella

    I’m not convinced this is the place to be writing the qualifications list for POTUS, but just having good advisors isn’t enough. A good POTUS must have, at the very least, a powerful memory, charisma, diplomacy, tact, a solid understanding of American history and law, a solid grasp on international affairs, economic principles, US policy both internal and external, an ability to analyze masses of new information on the fly and then integrate that with old information, management skills, critical thinking skills, empathy, passion, good instincts, and lots of energy.

    As for C.S. Lewis, my question is this: was Palin talking about the Chronicles of Narnia, or was she reading Lewis’s theological books for adults? Because there’s a world of difference between those bodies of work, and she doesn’t strike me as much of a theologian.

  96. birkwearingblamer

    The problem with Palin as the VP is that she would be second in line for the presidency with an old president who has been treated for cancer. Four years is a long time. I wish McCain continued health but no one can be sure of that. Also, McCain didn’t have the energy to be the president, and no one knew how much he would delegate to the VP and other executives. Those things and the party platform sucked.

    I hear that in the East people are more conscious of what university or college a person attends. Maybe a blamer here can address that. Down in the Southwest, as long as a person graduated from a respected state university with good grades, opportunities exist and respect may be earned. If people around you don’t respect you as a person, then it’s time to find a new crowd. I choose my friends carefully, and respect for others and kindness are high on my list.

  97. HazelStone

    “HazleStone[sic]: Lewis is by no means unchallenging. There is rigor in every field; Christian apologetics and theology is no slouch area. That Lewis being regarded as an authority poses a problem for you says to me that your issue is more with Lewis’ different world view than with his capacity for intellectualism. You can be an intellectual in an arsehole area; doesn’t make you not an intellectual.”

    I think CS Lewis is kind of a lightweight, based on my very minimal reading of him. Also, I’d dispute Christian theology as an actually respectable discipline. I’d say the same thing of EvoPsych or Astrology. But hey, that’s me.

    I’m with Jez. MANY people flatly and publically said Dubya wasn’t qualified to be Pres. Molly Ivins is a good example, one of many. There’s been a lot of despicable sexist BS hurled at Cadidate Palin, saying she’s not particularly qualified and intellectually incurious is not part of that. At least not as it has been argued here (IMO).

  98. delphyne

    “As for C.S. Lewis, my question is this: was Palin talking about the Chronicles of Narnia, or was she reading Lewis’s theological books for adults?”

    This is just sexism. Are you seriously arguing that you think a candidate for VP, whatever political party they are from, would be saying their favourite reading is a children’s author? What do you think she’d be reading? She’s a fundie Christian moving in those circles, she’ll be reading what they are reading which is stuff like CS Lewis’s writings on Christianity.

    Men *never* face this kind of shit.

    Obama has been hailed as some kind of intellectual hero despite the fact there is precious little evidence that he is. What is his bed-time reading? What were his grades at Columbia?

    Hazlestone, you might think Chrisian Theology is lightweight but it’s pretty much what every ancient university in the West was founded on. There’s a reason why it was called “the Queen of the Sciences”. Fuck, I can’t believe I’m defending theology, just because you’ve decided to downgrade it in order to make sure Sarah Palin gets no credit whatsoever for any intellectual interests she might have.

  99. delphyne

    Sorry I misquoted, you don’t think it’s respectable. Well Oxford, Cambridge, the Sorbonne, the University of Bologna should all be hanging their heads in shame for having founded their institutions on such an intellectually disreputable subject.

  100. birkwearingblamer

    President Obama was president of the Harvard Law Review. I think that alone gives him “intellectual cred.”

  101. ivyleaves

    I read C S Lewis’ space trilogy (for adults), and skipped the Chronicles of Narnia as I was already in university at the time. I can testify, as a former godbag, that pretty much no one in fundamentalist Christian circles was reading or talking anything else by him. They really loved Tolkien, though. Other popular fiction was by Beverly Lewis. For theology, Tim LaHaye (and wife, Beverly) was popular, especially stuff on proper christian marriage (keep the women in line). This was WAY before the Left Behind series. Otherwise, most stuff recommended would be bible-study-centered, because the bible is the focus of fundamentalist theology. Names mentioned in regards to that would be: Strong’s Concordance (reference work), study bibles: Zondervan’s, Nave’s, Scofield. There is a strong anti-intellectual streak in the born-again crowd. I was not encouraged much in going to college, despite being very gifted in that arena.

  102. ivyleaves

    Scratch the reference to Beverly Lewis, I got her mixed up with Beverly Lahaye and forgot to remove that part. Please note that christian bookstore women writers of non-fiction write about the proper role(s) of women, and write about romance with the right christian guy in fiction. Bleah.

  103. yttik

    After 102 posts, now Twisty really, really needs to bath her lobe. And here she is without a well pump. Sigh.

  104. birkwearingblamer

    We haven’t gotten over 100 in a long time. Bump for one more post.

  105. Spiders

    Would it shock americans to know that in australia it’s not uncommon for our politicians to be ‘uneducated’? Our prime minister before last never went to university at all? Dropped out of school at fifteen. Yet the blokes in charge here seem to be just as good at fucking shit up for us all as they do in the us. Maybe we just need less men in the parliament rather than more degrees.

  106. denelian

    delphyne:

    honestly, when i heard Palin read C.S. Lewis, i *also* assumed that it was Narnia. because most people? most people ONLY know about Narnia – they don’t know about the rest of his work. so assuming that someone saying that her favorite books are the Narnia based on the name of the author? makes perfect sense.
    hell, *my* favorite books are ALL fiction.

    it’s an obvious leap in logic, to say that a person who likes a famous author is speaking about his most popular books. if i say that my favorite author is Robert Heinlein, are you going to think i mean his science fiction, or his various works on military aircraft?

  107. Jill

    Mang, when I wrote this post, I sure never expected it would result in blamer support for a skeevy antifeminist politician.

    Denelian: shift key! Also, little known fact: on a post with over 100 comments, as soon as Heinlein is invoked, the thread devolves into pointless bickering immediately. I’ll save everyone the trouble, and state once again that he was a sexist knob, and that the reason many adult nerds think fondly of him is that, as children, they identified with his male characters, which as a result helped them internalize the sexist thinking that made this post necessary and has caused Delphyne to blow a lobe defending theology.

  108. pheenobarbidoll

    Men *never* face this kind of shit.”

    They face it here.

    I think Palin is an asshole.

    Her assholiness outshines everything else about her, so her intelligence is moot. I don’t care how smart/not smart a fucking asshole is.

  109. RKMK

    denelian – I’m decrying lies. That’s it.

    Jezebella – I’m simply curious, because I think I remember your name from a post a-way-back-when: Did you support Hillary Clinton, (smart-as-a-damn-whip, unfailingly-prepared, carnivorously-educated-{both-formally-and-self-initiated} went-to-grad-school-and-everything-when-it-wasn’t-so-easy-for-women, staunchly-feminist Hillary Clinton) in the 2008 primaries?

  110. Jezebella

    RKMK, indeed yes, I did vote for Hillary in the primaries. Why do you ask?

  111. birkwearingblamer

    RKMK, did you support Hillary Clinton? The tone of you post makes me think that you don’t approve of her.

    WTF is “carnivorously-educated?”

  112. RKMK

    Oh, Jezebella, I sincerely apologize – I was reading this read last week, and for some reason, my brain mixed up “BadKitty”s comments with your name in my memory banks. I honestly have no idea why, and I should have double-checked the thread before shooting my mouth off.

    (While this is no real defense, you would hardly believe the amount of people who simultaneously hiss at Palin for her “uneducated” folksiness whilst sneering at That Raging Bitch Hillary Clinton [Who Does That Uppity C*nt She Think She Is?]) Again: apologies! I was far too trigger-happy in this case.

  113. RKMK

    birkinwearingblamer – I have a comment in moderation directed towards Jezebella that likely explicates this, but no, I love Hillary Clinton. (And I never thought I’d say that about any politician. Ever.)

  114. birkwearingblamer

    I obviously didn’t catch the tongue-in-check tone of your post. then. I supported Hillary Clinton and voted for her in the primary.

  115. Violet Socks

    Mang, when I wrote this post, I sure never expected it would result in blamer support for a skeevy antifeminist politician.

    It seems that some blamers know that the bullshit published about Palin (and unfortunately repeated here) was just that — bullshit. Palin considers herself a feminist, and except for the abortion thing, she’s more explicitly feminist than the average American. When a regular Jane with that kind of background proclaims her feminist sympathies, it doesn’t seem terribly productive to ridicule her or indulge in the misogynist slander put out by the political hacks running against her. I mean, sure, by the standards of pure feminism, she’s an enabling godbag. But so are most American women. On the other hand, by the standards of the Republican Party or evangelical Christianity, she’s Twisty Faster.

  116. pheenobarbidoll

    That “abortion thing” is far too important to overlook. It’s the basis upon which my slavery or freedom rests.

  117. Violet Socks

    Abortion rights are important. But it’s interesting that Hugo Schwyzer, a male “pro-life” feminist and former member of and financial contributor to Feminists For Life, is allowed into the feminist community. He even blogs at RH Reality Check, and has been befriended by Amanda Marcotte.

    Schwyzer’s awkward pro-feminist/anti-abortion stance is the same as Sarah Palin’s, yet only Palin is reviled and ridiculed. How dare she call herself a feminist!

  118. pheenobarbidoll

    Oh? I seem to recall I revile that jackass Hugo pretty thoroughly. I don’t have a high opinion of Amanda and I no longer read Pandagon because of all the male posters who claim to be feminist but in reality are there to give Fresh!Manly!Wisdom! and berate feminist posters.

    Abortion rights are crucial. There are no buts after that. The hot second you (general use) try to control my reproduction is the hot second I toss you into the Deserves A Kick In The Face Repeatedly pile. That includes Palin, and I’m not going to give her slack when I Do Not give anyone else slack on that issue. I’m not going to be lenient on MY reproductive rights because other people apply double standards. This isn’t an academic debate. This is my life. If anyone sticks their nose in my uterus, they can expect to have it cut off.

  119. jael

    Fair enough, pheenobarbidoll, but the perception of Palin thing isn’t about you and your uterus, it’s about society generally.

  120. Violet Socks

    Oh? I seem to recall I revile that jackass Hugo pretty thoroughly. I don’t have a high opinion of Amanda and I no longer read Pandagon because of all the male posters who claim to be feminist but in reality are there to give Fresh!Manly!Wisdom! and berate feminist posters.

    Good for you! You’re consistent. But the point I was making wasn’t about you personally, but about the way Palin is reviled by the same feminists who think Hugo is just peachy. Or if not peachy, at least acceptable and certainly a feminist.

  121. Frog Princess

    It appears Gov. Palin is off to work toward positive chanage or something outside the Governor’s office. I watched her resignation speech and tried very hard to figure out what was impelling her, but apart from claims that she has explained why she is leaving, and descriptions of how basketball players have to throw the ball to the next player so the team can win, I heard only vague references to saving taxpayers’ money and getting out while the getting is good to avoid politics as usual.
    What fresh hell is she attempting to avoid having the AK taxpayers fund the investigation into?
    Alas[ka], we may never know.

  122. pheeno

    but about the way Palin is reviled by the same feminists who think Hugo is just peachy. Or if not peachy, at least acceptable and certainly a feminist.”

    There’s a word for them.

    Idiots. If you (general use) think Hugo is a feminist, then you’re an idiot.

  123. Agasaya

    An individual’s attributes are not identifiable through comparison. It hardly matters whether Ghenghis Khan or Hitler takes the award as the worst creation known to the human gene pool. You really don’t want to elect either of them to be your next President.

    Palin cannot possibly be considered a feminist when she believes in keeping children ignorant of the facts of their reproductive rights and responsibilities. It has nothing to do with her personal beliefs about abstinence or abortion. It has to do with the fact that she imposes her fear of this aspect of natural human behavior, based in religious mythology, upon the public at large. Anything that divorces people from any aspect of reality is a danger to women everywhere. The patriarchy thrives upon the shrouding of sexuality in a cloak of shame and mystery to hide its rapacious orientation from itself and its intended victims.

    We don’t need female ‘leaders’ to lead that charge under the banner of feminism. Feminism no longer means a working woman. It recognizes that women have always worked, with or without salary, for the public good. It now requires another litmus test and I would like to know what type of test is being applied by Palin fans. The attraction escapes me while Bristol reaps the poor crop that her mother sowed.

  124. Violet Socks

    Palin cannot possibly be considered a feminist when she believes in keeping children ignorant of the facts of their reproductive rights and responsibilities.

    She doesn’t believe that. She’s fully in favor of sex ed and contraception.

    I imagine you consider yourself a feminist. What I’m wondering is why, if you’re a feminist, you don’t even give Palin the courtesy of finding out what she actually believes, rather than simply accepting the lies created by political hacks? This is bizarre to me. It’s really not difficult to google and discover that Sarah Palin is in favor of contraception and sex ed, that the whole “abstinence-only” thing is a smear spread by Obama supporters.

  125. Innumina

    Sarah Palin is in favor of “discussing” birth control alongside abstinence education programs. Her statements on the issue have been carefully ambivalent; she thinks condoms are “relatively benign” and kids should “get the information from somewhere.” But she’s also very much pro-abstinence education. That’s not exactly “fully in favor of sex education and contraception.”

    When she seemed to veer slightly off-course during the campaign (while McCain was insisting that abstinence-only and only abstinence-only was the way to go), she corrected herself quickly enough (or was corrected). When the hardcore right-wingers became alarmed at these dangerous signs she was displaying of being somewhat less than implacably hostile towards anything but abstinence only, Palin was able to reassure them and get their full endorsement.

    So Palin may personally believe that birth control should remain a viable option, but she’s shown herself willing to capitulate on the issue quickly enough; she’s certainly not going to fight for birth control or sex education.

    Given that, and her unambiguously pro-life stance, it’s hard to see why she should be considered a feminist-friendly candidate just because she says a few things that are kinda sorta feminist. She’s no Phyllis Schlafly, but she’s no Hillary Clinton either.

  126. Agasaya

    No, it isn’t difficult to ‘google’ this information and I did. Note I never mentioned she advocated ‘abstinence only’ curriculum. Not being a member of a legislative branch of government, Palin was able to remain on the fence in many areas until hammered by the media to take a verbal stance on various issues. During her gubernatorial run, Palin opposed ‘explicit’ sex education. Does this mean ‘sock puppets’ are okay but xeroxes of diagrams from medical books are not? Palin never contradicted her party’s call for funding of abstinence only programs as per McCain’s preference. In confirming she was not against, non-explicit sex education, this did not mean she actually supported education about contraception (viewed by many as completely separate from sex ed). When specifically asked about condoms, she then mentioned being in favor of them. I can’t recall her ever speaking about this unless it was to answer charges of being anti-contraception. (Source, LA Times)

    Palin only supports abortion where the mother’s life is in jeopardy. I don’t feel a ‘feminist’ should dictate to other women that they must take even a child of rape or incest to term. I understand being unwilling to have an abortion yourself but that is a far cry from legislating such options away from other women. (source: Newsweek)

    I expect women in leadership positions to have unambiguous positions on these matters and to address themselves to women on the subject. I expect feminists to advocate for bodily freedoms which means explicit education in reproductive biology. Palin rarely did anything unscripted nor did she take the lead on these issues for the women of her party. Taking a defensive position on such matters falls short of what a feminist in HER position is required to do. We aren’t talking about a PTA member here, working with other community members to figure out the curriculum for sex ed in her own town. This woman was a mayor and then a governor.

    I have many other objections to Palin based upon her observed behavior (not reports of it by biased sources). However, they venture outside of the feminism realm so will not be discussed here.

  127. pheenobarbidoll

    Honestly, the fact she’s Republican is what does it for me. This is the party that openly, gleefully hates women, openly gleefully hates homosexuals, openly gleefully promotes the murder of doctors brave enough to provide abortion services, openly and gleefully hates the poor, openly and gleefully believes in some sky fairy that thinks I’m inferior to men etc etc etc.

    We all wade in the pool of P concessions to survive, but female Republicans dive in head first and splash around.

  128. Paige

    It’s really important to call out sexist attacks on Sarah Palin, of which there are lots, just as it’s important to call out sexist attacks on anyone.

    But I also think we should be clear about who Sarah Palin is and what her politics are. I find it very problematic to read Violet Socks’ blog posts on her own blog about Palin (and her comments here) that try to paint Palin as far more feminist than she really is, and far more moderate than she really is. I don’t know why Socks is doing this, but I would like to say to everyone who is interested in this issue: do not just take someone’s word for it that “smears” against Palin have been “debunked”! Check for yourself.

    It’s true that Palin is pro-contraception. But she also has aligned herself with the extreme anti-contraception (and Orwellian-named) anti-choice group “Feminists for Life.” When it comes to sex ed, the picture is even more mixed. In 2008, when she was running nationally for Vice President, she expressed support for teaching both contraception and abstinence, which sounds reasonable. But that’s a different tune than she sang in 2006 when she ran for Governor, when she signaled her approval of the Eagle Forum’s preferred “abstinence-until-MARRIAGE” (barf) sex ed program (and what about people who won’t/can’t get married? Don’t worry, one of Palin’s “top priorities,” she says, is “preserving the definition of marriage” to keep gays out!). These particular comments are not just from casual remarks quoted out of context or anything like that, but from Palin’s carefully composed, written responses to a series of questions in 2006 from the Eagle Forum:

    (see here)
    http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/09/01/palin-s-record-on-family-issues.aspx
    (or see full questionnaire here)
    http://irregulartimes.com/eagle-forum-2006-gubernatorial-candidate.html

    Excerpts:

    1. Complete the sentence by checking the applicable phrases (you can check more than one).
    Abortion should be:

    * Banned throughout entire pregnancy.
    * Legal to save the life of the mother.
    * Legal in case of rape and incest.
    * Legal if the baby is handicapped.
    * Legal if the baby has a genetic defect.
    * Legal in the first trimester.
    * Legal in the second trimester.
    * Legal in the third trimester.
    * Other:__________________

    Sarah Palin: I am pro-life. With the exception of a doctor’s determination that the mother’s life would end if the pregnancy continued. I believe that no matter what mistakes we make as a society, we cannot condone ending an innocent’s life.

    3. Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?
    Sarah Palin: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.

    8. Do you support parental choice in the spending of state educational dollars?
    Sarah Palin: Within Alaska law, I support parents deciding what is the best education venue for their child.

    12. In relationship to families, what are your top three priorities if elected governor?
    Sarah Palin: 1) Creating an atmosphere where parents feel welcome to choose the venues of education for their children; 2) Preserving the definition of “marriage” as defined in our constitution, and 3) Cracking down on the things that harm family life: gangs, drug use, and infringement of our liberties including attacks on our 2nd Amendment rights.

    That first question makes it very clear that Palin — unlike McCain! — thinks abortion should be illegal even in cases of rape and incest. The only exception Palin would allow is to save a woman’s life (she of course calls it a “mother’s” life as though anybody who is pregnant should already be called a “mother,” regardless of whether they have children, because the fetus makes a woman a “mother”! Barf.) Palin’s is a very extreme view. Some defenders of Palin like to say that Palin is just in favor of “the will of the people” deciding questions of abortion. But that’s just code for overturning Roe v. Wade and letting the states enact whatever restrictions they want. Other defenders of Palin always bring up the fact that one judge she appointed once was pro-choice. But in fact, as Caroline’s comment above explains, that was not a pro-choice move by Palin at all, but a conservative move to keep an environmentalist off the Alaska court. In a different appointment situation, where Palin could appoint anyone she wanted to the post of Alaska Attorney General, she picked the extremely, extremely egregious Wayne Ross, who denies making the most impressively horrific comment he is accused of making (“If a guy can’t rape his wife, who’s he gonna rape?”) but that comment is just the tip of the iceberg.
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-04-13/palins-new-disaster
    (Any thoughts about Wayne Ross, all you defenders of Palin out there?)

    I hate to keep harping on the rape kits story, but here, too, the supposed “debunking” of the “smear” gets ahead of itself. The “debunking” of the rape kit story consists of showing that it was supposed to be the victims’ insurance companies, not victims themselves, who got the bills for the rape kits. Well, that’s obviously way better than charging rape victims directly. But that doesn’t make it magically okay. Call me old-fashioned, but my view is that rape is a crime, and the police need to pay for investigation costs, just as they do with all other crimes. If I am raped, I don’t want the bill for investigating the crime to go to my insurance company (which might then get to decide what investigative services to “approve” or not, especially because Palin’s police budget eliminated the state money for the kits [see Jill's link above]; which could certainly ask me its own set of intrusive insurance-company questions about what happened; and which ultimately could charge me anyway or could charge me more for health insurance to recover these costs). No. I’m sorry, but it needs to be the way it is in most states (not all) and the way it was in Wasilla until Palin’s new chief of police arrived and changed the policy: a police expense. Not a victim or victim’s insurance expense.

    So in conclusion, I think we should all agree to:
    (1) call out sexist attacks on anyone, including Sarah Palin
    (2) don’t believe every bad thing you read about Sarah Palin, because some of it is exaggerated, AND ALSO
    (3) don’t believe every “debunking” of a “smear” against Sarah Palin, because a lot of the “smears” are actually true, despite what you might read on certain blogs that are heavily invested in defending Palin for whatever reason.

  129. Paige

    Also, one more thing.

    One of the most sexist things about this whole, sad Sarah Palin saga is this: putting Sarah Palin on a national ticket in the first place showed just how amazingly sexist and patriarchal are our politics in general, and the Republican Party / John McCain in particular.

    Sarah Palin was blatantly, shockingly, stunningly unprepared for national office. Her bizarre responses to very standard, softball questions about both domestic and foreign policy made it obvious immediately that she was such a lightweight that if she had been a man, the Republican Party would never have even considered her. When she took the stage at the Republican convention, I thought, “Really? This is the most qualified female candidate the Republican party could come up with? That’s sad.”

    But as it turned out it was even worse than that. Sarah Palin was NOT the most qualified Republican woman McCain could have picked. Not by a long shot. There are smart, highly experienced Republican women out there, like Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas or former Governor Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey, whom I would have disagreed with, sure, but who would have answered policy questions and engaged in policy arguments as credibly as Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty or any of the other possible Republican VPs – i.e. FAR more effectively than the Sarah Palin train wreck. It’s true that most of the great female politicians right now in America are Democrats, from Hillary Clinton on down the line, but there are a few smart, credible Republicans too. McCain didn’t choose any of them. And I think it’s because those women are generally older than Palin and not as Patriarchy-2k-compliant. Palin’s youth and sex appeal got her a lot more attention than any of those more experienced female politicians (none of whom were ever even considered by McCain) would have received. And McCain knew this. He KNEW he was taking Palin’s youth and sex appeal to the bank – that voters would respond to her despite her lack of policy chops. And so he cynically didn’t even bother to check whether Palin could answer domestic or international policy questions coherently.

    Now THAT is what I call a patriarchy!

    When Letterman makes sexist attacks on Palin, that’s just yet another nasty facet of the same patriarchy.

  130. soopermouse

    @Honestly, the fact she’s Republican is what does it for me. This is the party that openly, gleefully hates women, openly gleefully hates homosexuals, openly gleefully promotes the murder of doctors brave enough to provide abortion services, openly and gleefully hates the poor, openly and gleefully believes in some sky fairy that thinks I’m inferior to men etc etc etc.@
    ORLY? How is that different from being a democrat?

    @The attraction escapes me while Bristol reaps the poor crop that her mother sowed.@
    Because mothers are always responible for all their children’s actions. There’s a word for that, what was it?
    what was it again?

  131. Agasaya

    Soopermouse:

    The ‘crop’ that Bristol reaps isn’t her pregnancy. No, mothers aren’t responsible for their kids having sex. This mother IS responsible for fostering the cloud of shame that surrounded her daughter. Sarah Palin believes in, and markets that shame in order to serve the patriarchy.

    The ‘crop’ sewn is the condemnation that goes with Bristol having had the unmitigated, sinful gall to have sex in the first place. Sex is considered to be the real mistake here and not the absence of contraception which led to the appearance of a baby. The crop was the incredible pressure for Bristol to marry the father of the child in order to ‘fix’ the ‘shame’ issue which was far more important to anyone than whether these two kids should be married.

    Pregnancy was simply proof that Hester ‘done it’ against all the rules. Marriage saves the child from being labeled a ‘bastard’, another variety of produce grown on that farm.

    Bristol’s actions are her own. The ‘fallout’ from her ‘fall’ (not that such a word ought to be used to describe having sex) belongs to Mommy’s world.

  132. Agasaya

    Note: The wrong lessons are being taught about Bristol as per this article which was part of the ‘damage’ control when the marriage didn’t go off as planned-

    http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/us_world/NATL-Bristol-Palin-on-Levi-Im-Glad-We-Didnt-Get-Married-.html?corder=&pg=1

    Sex is blamed, not the lack of contraception. Why didn’t Bristol get to celebrate her graduation? Not enough baby sitters at home? Again, a climate of punishment is part of the ‘P’.

  133. soopermouse

    really? Are you sure you aren’t projecting?
    because guess what? It is sexist and woman hating to blame any woman for havign a child out of wedlock.

    “This mother IS responsible for fostering the cloud of shame that surrounded her daughter. ”
    Are you insane? Where did she foster that sort of belief? If memory serves she treated her daughter with more love and acceptance than you seem capable of, which kinda makes her the better oerson than you in this regard. She did not shame her daughter or anyone else for that matter, but YOU DO because you are in such an accute need to hate her.
    Seriously people, just learn about what the damn woman is saying instead of what you imagine that she has said.

  134. soopermouse

    “This mother IS responsible for fostering the cloud of shame that surrounded her daughter. ”
    the only people I have seen fostering that shame are the alleged feminists who decided to spew unmitigaed hatred at the woman who had the guts to run against Obama.
    You and thos elike you, morons who have to lie and spread shit long debunked are the ones who fostered that shame. ot her.
    Fucking shame on you.

  135. Anna Belle

    Oh geez, now I remember why I hate women who identify as Democrats. They’re just as stupid as women who identify as Republicans. They’re both getting duped by their own patriarchified party, and they won’t even bother to think through their so-called choices. Both sides are bought and sold by the men in the party using abortion currency. Both sides have been branded by this issue like cattle. I hope the cows are happy. I KNOW the bulls are. Sheesh.

  136. soopermouse

    Amen

  137. pheenobarbidoll

    “How is that different from being a democrat?”

    They don’t have the majority of the country hell bent on a christian crusade.

    BTW, I don’t identify as Democrat. Sorry to fuck up that moronic little assumption.

    http://www.stacyleeds.com/

    THIS is who I voted for.

  138. pheeno

    FWIW, if I have to make a list of what US political parties kill more of us, Republicans top the list. Historically and presently, our conditions are significantly worse when a repub is in office. And anyone who aligns themselves with our number 1 murderers can rot for all I care. Not everyone comes from a purely “american” perspective here. Some of us identify with other just as valid (yet evidently forgotten) Nations, that exist within this country.

    I think I hear some privilege bursting. Sorry about that. Well, not really.

  139. Sis

    Who are you referring to pheno. Which “Nations”.

  140. soopermouse

    funny how many people feel the urge to defend their need to join in Palin bashing with irrelevant asides just because hating on her is OK in “feminist” circles.

  141. pheenobarbidoll

    Funny how other people can’t tell the difference between valid critisism and “hating” because they’ve jumped in with all their privilege and don’t want to admit it. Some people just assumed other posters where democrats and being kneejerking democrats while never even considering the possibility others might not even BE in the typical white american centric political perspective. Other posters assume it’s just band wagon Palin bashing without bothering to consider perhaps the critisism is coming from a non white non american centric marginalized Nation within a Nation. And god knows, WOC feminists just can’t wait to hop onto the what’s popular in feminist circles bandwagon! Wooweee!

  142. soopermouse

    @Sex is blamed, not the lack of contraception. Why didn’t Bristol get to celebrate her graduation? Not enough baby sitters at home? Again, a climate of punishment is part of the ‘P’.@

    wow, projecting much?

  143. soopermouse

    “Some of us identify with other just as valid (yet evidently forgotten) Nations, that exist within this country.

    I think I hear some privilege bursting. ”

    you are most welcome to my Jewish third world immigrant privilege

  144. soopermouse

    Agasaya, that’s a lot of dishonesty in one post. You migth want to ahve it looked at. First- as far as I see it, it’s Bristol Palin saying so- and have met many mothers who faced with the hardships of motherhood, agree with her.
    There is nothing said about her being punished or anything, just a horrible inferrence made by someone who needs a reason to hate on Sarah Palin. Implying that the motehr is responsible for everything teh daughter does or says is woman hating.
    And I haven’t seen anythign about Bristol not attending graduation from lack of a baby sitter. But I see your ugly prejudices and assumptions, and quite frankly, it’s tremendously disgusting

  145. Anje

    “Other posters assume it’s just band wagon Palin bashing without bothering to consider perhaps the critisism is coming from a non white non american centric marginalized Nation within a Nation.”

    Oh god, I step away and deal with life, hoping feminists will regain their souls and stop embracing whatever hip trend of woman hating is coming down the pike, and we’re still here. If all else fails, whip out the privilege.

    Time to grow up. You’re at a computer debating on a message board, spouting trendy crap like “non white non american centric marginalized Nation within a Nation.” That’s some privilege right there. I don’t give a shit. I know… oooh I’m supposed to be scared because you called Everyone But You privileged. Excuse me while I buckle under the sheer force of your plight. Jesus.

  146. Agasaya

    Soopermouse, this is to save you future trouble. I won’t be responding to your posts because they lack rationality, focus and are rife with assumptions which are as irrelevant as they are inaccurate.

    For the rest on this thread, I appreciate limiting the scope of discussion to issues and actions; not rhetoric and generalizations. We may all come from different places (Mars in my case, apparently), but many of us appear to be heading in the same direction. Nice traveling with you.

  147. Violet Socks

    I hate to keep harping on the rape kits story, but here, too, the supposed “debunking” of the “smear” gets ahead of itself.

    On the contrary: the rape kit smear has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. It’s also been traced to the Obama campaign, just for shits and giggles.

    The most interesting thing about your comment is the intensity of your need to believe the rape kit smear is still somehow true.

  148. Agasaya

    The local Alaskan paper regarding the rape kit issue which, by the way, is common in many municipalities. Disgraceful, yes, but still not unique to Wasilla.

    http://www.frontiersman.com/articles/2000/05/23/news.txt

  149. Violet Socks

    Sarah Palin was NOT the most qualified Republican woman McCain could have picked.

    No one is ever picked for VP because they are most qualified. No one. You think Biden is the most qualified person to be VP? You think any of our past VPs have been the “most qualified” person? The VP slot is always about balancing the ticket and pulling in some other demographic segments. Always.

    Hell, no one in politics is there because they’re the most qualified. Barack Obama is not the most qualified black person in the country; he’s just the guy who could get elected.

    Funny how a whole different set of rules applies to Palin. There is name for that.

  150. soopermouse

    Agasaya- I have called you on your bias and unfounded assumptions that you use in order to fuel your Palin hatred. You change facts in order to suit your already frmed beliefs, and lack even the modicum of awareness required to admit to cognitive dissonance.
    In the first link you posted- nothing in that column says ANYTHING about Sarah Palin, and absolutely nothing of teh facts presented leads to your bizarre and hateful conclusions. If there is someone who findsBristol’s pregnancy shameful – well, some of the people posting here including yourself seem to have a lot less tolerance and understanding than the woman you demonize. She supports her daughter- which makes her a better person than you are.

    The @punishment@ bullshit is a lunatic conclusion unsupported by anything in that column, and your temper tantrum shows the depth of your lack of logic.

    The second link you posted is evidence of the same blindness- there is NOTHING in it that even mentions Sarah Palin’s name, neither does it in any way shame or form corroborate the accusation that she harged the rape victims for their kits. You seem to not be aware that the only phrase that can be seen as corroborating your accusation, which is
    “In the past weve charged the cost of exams to the victims insurance company when possible. I just dont want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer, Fannon said.”

    I will even leave aside the fact that the police is not subordinate to the mayor. The operative term here is “insurance companies”. There is nothign in it about charging the victims.

    Do you ahve any other faulty reasoning for me to debunk? It is fairly obvious that you need a reason to hate Sarah Palin, and will twist yourself into a pretzel attempting to justify it. Pathetic.

  151. pheenobarbidoll

    you are most welcome to my Jewish third world immigrant privilege”

    3rd world immigrant privilege of actually existing in this country outside of old westerns and halloween costumes. Nah…you keep it. I’ve had my fill of that privilege shoved down my throat, thanks.

  152. Paige

    Violet Socks,
    you wrote: “the rape kit smear has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked.” Well, in your mind it has. Perhaps you think it’s just fine to bill the insurance companies of rape victims for their rape kits? I’d agree that it’s better to send the bill to the insurance company first than to send it to victims so that they have to submit the claims to their insurance companies… but either way, it’s bad. You have never disputed that it was Palin’s police chief who changed Wasilla’s policy on this point (and Palin herself who approved a budget that zeroed out the budget item for this, see Jill’s link). So… if I only read your blog, I would believe that this “smear” was “thoroughly” “debunked.” But I read other news sources and I found out more information. I concluded that your “debunking” was, to put it nicely, a bit of mild overzealousness in defense of a candidate you clearly care a lot about. I respect that you’re trying to defend Palin against attacks that often are heavy with exaggerations and half-truths. But that’s not a good reason to engage in exaggerations yourself.

  153. Paige

    Violet Socks,
    you wrote: “Funny how a whole different set of rules applies to Palin. There is name for that.”

    In a way, you and I agree. Palin gets more than her fair share of crap, on account of the fact that she is a woman. All women in politics face this double standard; Palin is no different.

    But where I think you really fail to grasp the double standard applied to Palin is that when McCain chose Palin, he was employing an especially nasty double standard: he held her to a shockingly, disquietingly LOW standard, on account of her relative youth, her patriarchy-2k-compliant looks, and the swoons that McCain cynically knew would therefore follow among many voters in our deeply patriarchal political culture. The fact that McCain chose Palin is a deep, nasty insult to all women, because it says that when you’re a woman, different and lower standards apply because you’re not necessarily there for your policy acumen or your ideas. You’re there to be an exciting female presence on stage to get the crowds riled up. It’s too depressing for words.

    Hillary Clinton’s Presidential campaign was inspiring to me and to many people because she was such a brilliant, capable, thoughtful leader. I believed in her because she represented the best idea of what a woman who runs for President, or any person who runs for President, can be. Palin, on the other hand, set us WAY back. She was chosen as a symbol of almost the opposite idea: the idea that women aren’t to be chosen on the basis of their policy acumen, their ideas, or their capabilities as leaders (because if McCain had been choosing on any of those grounds, he would clearly have chosen any of numerous other Republican women over Palin) but rather on whether they can talk big, look great, and excite a crowd.

    It made me ill from the start to see what the McCain campaign was trying to do.

    It just makes me sad to see you trying to defend Palin endlessly on your blog, treating every ill-considered, poorly executed move or statement she makes (see, e.g, her recent rambling, contradictory, bizarre resignation speech) as though it contains some hidden gem of wisdom or strategic coherence that is simply not there in reality. I don’t understand why you do it. Why do you do it?

  154. Cathy

    Paige – thank you for all that. Violet Socks was starting to annoy me. I totally agree with you that McCain’s choice was purely cynical; he never would have selected Palin if she weren’t some “hot babe,” in order to grab attention.

  155. soopermouse

    Paige

    Both you and Jill seem to conveniently gloss over the part where there is no evidence that any rape victim or their insurance company havign billed for a rape kil during alin’s tenure or immediaely afterwards. Intellectual dishonesty much?

    “rather on whether they can talk big, look great, and excite a crowd”
    That’s called a politician- Obama was chosen for the same reasons, plus skin color. Funny how it’s OK for men.

  156. soopermouse

    Pheeno
    I did not realize you had some kind of monopoly on oppression in there here parts of the Internet. My bad

  157. pheeno

    sooper- I did not realize only immigrants from other countries came from 3rd worlds…For some reason I had this crazy idea that 99% of Indian reservations were 3rd world countries within a democracy. That gives many people outside reservations lots of privilege they aren’t even aware of. You have some of that. Deal with it. You’ve gotten the privilege of living on our stolen land as well. Sorry if that doesn’t ring as non privileged to me. I’m even sorrier you don’t seem to be aware of it. But hey, you can dismiss your ignorance by behaving as if merely bringing up our oppression is unworthy and someone takes something away from YOU.

    Nice.

  158. soopermouse

    psst Pheeno: not everyone on the internets lives in the USA. Amazing isn’t it? It’s like you are talking out of your rear end or something.

    Your assumptions are tremendously amusing.

  159. pheenobarbidoll

    pssst- NA’s don’t all live in the USA. We’re our own Nations, thank you. Sovereign Cherokee Nation to name one.

  160. pheenobarbidoll

    Sis
    July 5, 2009 at 12:30 pm

    Who are you referring to pheno. Which “Nations”.”

    Sorry Sis, I did not see your post until now.

    I’m talking about the Indian Nations. We are (when we’re “lucky” enough to be recognized and not constantly threatened with removal) our own Nations.

  161. Gayle

    “Perhaps you think it’s just fine to bill the insurance companies of rape victims for their rape kits?”

    Am I the only one repulsed by the use of rape as a political tool here? Because I think it’s absolutely disgustingly puke-worthy to prey on victims in this way in order to gain votes.

    I watched politicians do it with Mike Dukakis and then with my Gov. Deval Patrick. This time “my side” (or what use to be “my side”) did it, and irony of ironies, they did it to turn the woman into the “pro-rape” candidate.

    I probably wouldn’t minds AS MUCH if the other side actually offered to do something to reduce/end rape. But I’ve heard no great pronouncements from the Obama team about how they are going to combat this crime over hte next 4-8 years. Nothing. Nada. Zip.

    And they won’t either because to do so they’d have to take on rape culture and educate boys and fight pornography as well as take on the general objectification of women and our role in society as the other. Neither party will ever do any of this because the men in both like things just the way they are.

  162. soopermouse

    pheeno
    nice try but seriously- your assumptions ARE ridiculous unless you want to assert the Native nations owning the whole world.
    Also, you see the blue sigs? Where your cursor changes? That’s called a link If you click on it, it takes you to a page where you can find out more about the poster. You may even find out that not everyone lives in North America. Amazing isn’t it?

  163. soopermouse

    Gayle
    In this particular case, Illinois, the state where the almighty Obama was senator has a similar measure. Funny how nobody talked about that.
    Also, my understanding is that Alaska has had a fund to deal with these requests for quite a while (since before Palin was mayor), and the purpose why the bills were sent to the insurance companies was in order to have them process the claims.

  164. pheenobarbidoll

    your assumptions ARE ridiculous unless you want to assert the Native nations owning the whole world.”

    Like your assumption that those who dislike republicans must be democrats? Or that everyone in the US is that and that alone and not from their own Nations? Or that there aren’t 3rd world Nations within the US so your 3rd world residency is supposed to impress?

    “You may even find out that not everyone lives in North America. Amazing isn’t it?”

    So now you move the goal post to make your assumption, what? Valid? I already pointed out not everyone comes from an american centric, rebub/democrat perspective but that was ignored because you can’t admit some of us may have valid critisisms of Palin?

    But hey, have it your way. Everyone in the US is either 1)repub or 2)democrat and 3)not living in 3rd world conditions within another Nation and don’t have a unique perspective that you can just brush away under the headline of USA or now North America. We get it from people in North America…dunno why I’m so surprised to see it from anyone else.

  165. pheenobarbidoll

    Oh and sooper? Your bio says location:Dalaran. That doesn’t tell me anything except you play WoW. Possibly too often. And I’m well aware not everyone comes from North America. Just who do you think perpetrated our genocide? It wasn’t North Americans, we’ve been here for 20,000 years.

  166. soopermouse

    So, let me get this straight: you believe EVERYONE on the planet lives on stolen native land? I think they have pills for that disorder. Weak defense that fools nobody.

  167. Paige

    “’rather on whether they can talk big, look great, and excite a crowd’: That’s called a politician- Obama was chosen for the same reasons, plus skin color.”

    Wow.

    Give this a try: Listen to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Sarah Palin. Listen to their policy discussions, debates, books, and so on. You really can’t detect any difference there? Two of these people are making substantive appeals, just bristling with policy innovation and deep knowledge of how to make our system work better. The other flees any discussion of substance as quickly as possible and, when pressed, dissolves into rambling incoherence and platitudes.

    If you really can’t tell which one of these people is which, then you probably should go hang out at Violet Socks’ blog! Or alternatively, any of a long list of pro-Pain right-wing hack websites.

  168. pheenobarbidoll

    So, let me get this straight: you believe EVERYONE on the planet lives on stolen native land? I think they have pills for that disorder. Weak defense that fools nobody.”

    I’m going back and trying to find where you find that implication. I’ve repeatedly specified Indian Nations in the US. So far my only assumption wasn’t a huge stretch, given that we’re discussing US politicians and US political parties (see a theme here dear?)So you mentioning immigration doesn’t make my assumption some wild shot in the dark. I made it once, and you corrected it. I’ve not since said one damn thing about immigrants in other countries, other than obviously, total fucking dismissal isn’t just a white US thing when Indians are concerned.

    NOW, on to your assumptions which you’ve yet to even touch.

    1)Your “how is that different than democrats” is wildly ignorant of US Native issues. I can give you a long bloody fucking list of how repubs and dems differ in some significant ways. Bloody is literal in this case.

    2)Not everyone in the US identifies with 2 political parties. Disliking one more does not mean you think the other main one is a ball of fucking sunshine.

    3)Not everyone in the US has the typical American-centric perspective that you have thus far assumed we have. Some of us belong to our own goddamn Nations. And THAT is our perspective. We DON’T assume everyone is from North American. We DO know that people not from North American exist, mainly because a whole shitload of non North Americans boated their unwelcomed asses over here and butchered us for our land. And a great deal still come, and still sit their asses on that very same land. Many of us were enslaved and shipped off to non North American countries.

    I’ve made one assumption, you’ve made 3.

  169. soopermouse

    Pheeno
    “1)Your “how is that different than democrats” is wildly ignorant of US Native issues. I can give you a long bloody fucking list of how repubs and dems differ in some significant ways. Bloody is literal in this case.”

    The discussion is not about the native issues and has never been. You are dragging your own agenda in here to make a point I am yet to see, but it comes back to this:
    this discussion had nothing to do with native issues and I will not engage in a red herring debate for your pet cause. This discussion is about Sara Palin. What you are doing with your faux outrage is derailing a discussion for something that, while it is a worthwile cause, is not related to the issue. You calimed that you had a different perspective on this issue beause you are native, but failed to explain or elaborate on it. Quite frankly, I ain’t buying that because the situation is simple either you agree or disagree with hatred piled on a woman and lies used against her just because she had the audacity to run for VP without fully subscribing to some people’s agendas. To be honest, there is no special view your ethnicity can bring to this, because nobody’s culture is an excuse for womanhating.

    2. “Not everyone in the US identifies with 2 political parties. Disliking one more does not mean you think the other main one is a ball of fucking sunshine.”

    I did not say nor imply that. Again, red herring.
    Trying to derail a discussion for your pet issues does not help you nor does it win you self righteousness points- regardless of whether you are indeed a Native or a white person with a fraction of native blood who, despite living and bathing in White privilege for alifetime decides one day that , since she has two drops of Native bood, she can claim a slice of the “amagad I’m oppressed” pie. I am not implying you belong to this category, but I have seen a lot of people who do, and such it cannot be excluded.

    3.”3)Not everyone in the US has the typical American-centric perspective that you have thus far assumed we have. Some of us belong to our own goddamn Nations. And THAT is our perspective. We DON’T assume everyone is from North American. We DO know that people not from North American exist, mainly because a whole shitload of non North Americans boated their unwelcomed asses over here and butchered us for our land. And a great deal still come, and still sit their asses on that very same land. Many of us were enslaved and shipped off to non North American countries.”

    You are the one who keeps speaking about me livingon your nation stolen land and referring to “this country”. Insofar the only America centric position has bene your own, and all of this idiotivc derailing seems to only serves to mask the factthat you continuously make errors in judgement.

    Also
    “So far my only assumption wasn’t a huge stretch, given that we’re discussing US politicians and US political parties (see a theme here dear?)”
    This is stupid. Believe it or not, US politics do not only affect the US. The idiotic mistakes of teh American voters have a way of poisoning the whole world. If you believe that an US resident can beinterested in US politics, then , seriously, your issues are far larger thanI can address.

    And give me a fucking break about “third world conditions”. ou ahve no idea what you’re taking about.

    Paige

    “Give this a try: Listen to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Sarah Palin. Listen to their policy discussions, debates, books, and so on. You really can’t detect any difference there? Two of these people are making substantive appeals, just bristling with policy innovation and deep knowledge of how to make our system work better. The other flees any discussion of substance as quickly as possible and, when pressed, dissolves into rambling incoherence and platitudes. ”

    As opposed to Obama’s “uh , uh what she said” when the teleprompter isn’t present? puh-leaze. You might want to have that Kool Aid addiction looked into.

    And yeah, he sure is making substantive appeals. Like stating that FOCA is not a priority for him, like stating that women have late term abortions when they are feeling blue, that they should make their decision by consulting with their families, husbands and pastors and did mention him not being interested enough in the position on Roe of his potential SCOTUS appointee? Did I mention his full hearted defense of the burqa? You sure have some ovaries to defend this asshat.

    Funny how you defend a politician who has gone back on most of his promises to women, who could not argue his way out of a paperbag without a teleprompter and subservient media.

    Paige, I guess the hopium consumers are still going strong. The only person who did KNOW what she was talking about WAS Hillary Clinton. You know, the woman’s whose nomination was stolen by Obama with corruption, electoral fraud and misoginist tropes? Remember the “periodically feeling down”? “claws out”? “likeable enough”?

    Obama is a hack, whose “substantive appeals” are carefully written by someone else and who cannot make 2 coherent phrases without a teleprompter- also a liar who wiggled his way into the WH on some people’s white guilt regardless of the fact that he went back on his promises even before he got elected.

  170. Agasaya

    Paige and Pheeno,

    You both have substantive commentary to offer on women’s issues as affected by culture, politics and individual players in that arena. Why dilute that valuable commodity by engaging with those demonstrating purely political agendas and using personal attacks to distract from a lack of data? By all means, continue making your points but you may want to address relevant issues to the group rather than any one individual. I’ve stopped reading certain comments and references to them are blowing my lobes beyond the capacity of ‘washing’ to refresh them.

    Our issues pre-date and post-date any single individual on the political scene. That is why discussion requires a longitudinal viewpoint as well as attention to current facts. Current events also show that a flash in the pan is just that – unlikely to persevere under pressure/heat. The number of X chromosomes possessed by an individual unfortunately doesn’t promise intellectual independence, superior faculties and training or the necessary tenacity to get any job done.

    I hope Jill, who has commented in the past about how long threads tend to devolve, will chime in soon.

    Pheeno, I’ve recently become aware of the toll from forced adoptions upon the Nations. Have any feminist groups ever addressed the issue or offered help to adoptees attempting to trace their heritages? Do you have a website?

  171. Paige

    Yes, long threads do tend to devolve. I have no interest in defending the policies of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, or any other individual politicians. (I do think it’s worth debunking the stories some people tell about Palin that aren’t true – see above – whether from the media or from pro-Palin bloggers. But this is not the place to have a long debate about the relative merits of individual American political leaders. I get that.)

    My point in the last comment was just that choosing Sarah Palin as a VP nominee was an insult to women. It illustrated the misogynistic depths of John McCain, the Republican Party, and American politics in general. That’s because Palin was chosen despite, not because of, her actual policy knowledge/skills.

    Some of the extreme Palin defenders on this comment thread seem to believe that Palin has hidden intellectual and analytic gifts that have not been apparent to the rest of us listening to her. Okay, suppose you’re right. Even if so, the problem is that McCain and his advisers did not choose her on account of any such gifts, but rather, as a shiny, young, patriarchy-2k-compliant figure who they knew would inspire exactly the kind of ridiculous, misogynistic, but massively positive “hot babe” interest across much of the American voting public. That’s why McCain’s choice of her — rather than any number of other Republican women he might have picked with more substance — was such a misogynistic slap in the face.

    Also, I think it was an insult to women and feminists to imagine that many would just automatically transfer their support for Hillary Clinton to Sarah Palin and vote for McCain/Palin, simply because Palin is female, despite the fact that Clinton and Palin have opposing positions on nearly every single policy issue on which Palin has a position. (There are a few exceptions – I’m glad Palin likes Title IX – but really, not many at all.) I found the idea that women/feminists could be bought off by nominating any person with ovaries, no matter her views – a hope that McCain’s advisers expressed openly – to be pretty insulting.

    But I want to make it clear that the insult here comes from McCain’s decision to CHOOSE Palin. I have no particular animosity toward Palin herself as a person. I even think that choosing her had unintended, but good, effects on Republicans, who for once had to (totally hypocritically) get in the game of calling out anti-feminist attacks, because they happened to be against the Republican team for once. That was nice. It didn’t last, but for a brief moment, some of the most anti-feminist people around were trying their best to sound like they thought misogyny was a problem.

  172. jael

    paige – i think that last paragraph of yours touches on for me I think the best thing to come out of Palin’s running.

    It’s not her politics, her beliefs or her actions. Rather, it’s that the half of the population that hold beliefs that most of us consider anti-ethical were represented by a woman.

    Now, chances are most of the people who have a socially conservative outlook on life are never going to become pro-choice feminist liberals. They’ll prob. always believe different things about how the world works than we do. But irrespective of their belief system, they were represented by a woman. If you’re a socially conservative teenage girl, you’ve now got someone to look at and say – hey, she could do it, maybe I can to, in much the same way that one would hope Clinton is to liberal female teenagers. That can’t be a bad thing.

  173. pheenobarbidoll

    The discussion is not about the native issues and has never been. You are dragging your own agenda ”

    The response *I* was responding to is. If you ask how republicans are different than democrats (which you did) then Indian issues come into play. I have zero tolerance for the republican party because THEY KILL INDIANS. Right now, today modern times. Anyone who is affiliated with that party will come under critisism, and it is valid. But you and several others have dismissed valid complaints of Palin being a member of a party THAT KILLS INDIANS as kneejerk democrat complaining and/or sexism.

    “I did not say nor imply that. Again, red herring.”

    Oh? Asking how repub bigotry differs from dem bigotry DOESN’T imply I had a bias for dems? Bullshit.

    “You are the one who keeps speaking about me livingon your nation stolen land and referring to “this country”. I”

    No dear, try to keep up. I keep speaking of the people in this country (the US, ya know..the country PALIN is in? yeah that one) that came here from all over the world.

    “US politics do not only affect the US. The idiotic mistakes of teh American voters have a way of poisoning the whole world”

    REALLY???? *gasp* I had NO IDEA. Why thank you soopermouse! Until you said it I had NO CLUE that the idiotic mistakes of voters poisoned the rest of the world. I’d never know that, living here as a non white person who has family living on reservations! Thank you so much for educating this stupid Injun.

    “And give me a fucking break about “third world conditions”. ou ahve no idea what you’re taking about.”

    And you clearly have no idea what reservations are. Or what they’re like. Or anything about them at all as a matter of fact, or you wouldn’t have uttered such sheer shitcockery.

  174. pheeno

    Pheeno, I’ve recently become aware of the toll from forced adoptions upon the Nations. Have any feminist groups ever addressed the issue or offered help to adoptees attempting to trace their heritages? Do you have a website?”

    I’ve seen the issue addressed here and there, unfortunately Indian issues aren’t discussed as much as other issues. I don’t have a website, but have been pondering a feminist Indian blog for some time. It makes sense, since Indians were the first feminists in the US and Canada :)

  175. soopermouse

    The response *I* was responding to is. If you ask how republicans are different than democrats (which you did) then Indian issues come into play. I have zero tolerance for the republican party because THEY KILL INDIANS. Right now, today modern times. Anyone who is affiliated with that party will come under critisism, and it is valid. But you and several others have dismissed valid complaints of Palin being a member of a party THAT KILLS INDIANS as kneejerk democrat complaining and/or sexism.

    Reading comprehension: fail. The question was asked in the context of both parties’ atitude towards women. One has to wonder whether your deraling is pure intellectual dishonesty or some form of ADD.

    “The response *I* was responding to is. If you ask how republicans are different than democrats (which you did) then Indian issues come into play. ”
    Then you need to read the question in its context again.You decided to drag your agenda in in order to boost your self righteousness credentials and derail the discussion.

    “No dear, try to keep up. I keep speaking of the people in this country (the US, ya know..the country PALIN is in? yeah that one) that came here from all over the world.”
    Again, no relevance in the context of the discussion. You are working very hard a shoving your agenda into a discussion that has nothing to do with it.

    “And you clearly have no idea what reservations are. Or what they’re like. Or anything about them at all as a matter of fact, or you wouldn’t have uttered such sheer shitcockery.”

    I’m pretty sure the reservations where your alleged family lives don’t have secret police banging on their doors at 2 AM to take people away for having said a joke about the government. Pretty sure they don’t come with their own political prisons as well.

    Paige

    “My point in the last comment was just that choosing Sarah Palin as a VP nominee was an insult to women. It illustrated the misogynistic depths of John McCain, the Republican Party, and American politics in general. That’s because Palin was chosen despite, not because of, her actual policy knowledge/skills.”

    On the contrary, but your bias is showing: Palin was a very successful governor. Whether you like that or not, the truth still remains that she wa sin that regard, and whilst running for the VP spot, more qualified than the democrats teleprompter messiah who ran for the first spot. If you actually listed to what she said and nto to what people pretend that she said, you will notice that not also does she know her policies, but she can ALSO talk about them without the use of speeches written by someone else.

    “Even if so, the problem is that McCain and his advisers did not choose her on account of any such gifts, but rather, as a shiny, young, patriarchy-2k-compliant figure who they knew would inspire exactly the kind of ridiculous, misogynistic, but massively positive “hot babe” interest across much of the American voting public.”

    Yeah they couldn’t have possibly chosen her because she was a successful Governor. Are you even aware that your implication is sheer woman hating?

  176. Paige

    Soopermouse, it’s time to come back to Earth. You seem to be living on another planet. I don’t know how closely you’ve been following Alaska politics these last several years, but your assertion that Palin was a “successful governor” literally made me bust out laughing. It’s not just that Palin was an ineffective governor, it’s worse: she was someone who showed amazingly little interest in even showing up and doing the work. Even members of her own party complained that they simply could not get her to engage on most policy issues — or even to sit down and talk with legislators. In the first part of her term, Alaska’s budget was flush so she was able to spend lots of money and give Alaskans back some fat rebate checks. Then the economy tanked, along with Alaska’s budget, the state started to face some hard choices, and Palin decided she’d had enough and quit. That’s “successful”?

    I judge Palin by the same standards I would judge any politician, male or female. By those standards she would not have been anywhere near the list of the top twenty people McCain should have considered for VP. You seem to be judging Palin by similarly absymally low standards. I don’t think that’s a feminist move; I don’t even think it shows respect for Palin. I certainly don’t agree that it’s “sheer woman hating” to take a hard, clear look at the record, positions, and policy skills of a candidate like Sarah Palin, and conclude that she is way, way, way out of her depth.

    Is your idea that it’s “sheer woman hating” to conclude that any politician is no good if that politician happens to be female? If so, then you’re just the kind of voter the McCain campaign was banking on last year. I find the idea totally insulting that many women, feminists, or Hillary Clinton supporters would actually think that way. But I guess there are a few.

  177. Tigs

    Okay, soopermouse, you’ve got to stop being an ass about reservations.
    This isn’t the oppression olympics but if you knew jack about reservations both historically and today, you’d be embarrassed to make such statements.
    Anyone who has done any amount of research knows the abhorrent levels of un-prosecuted crimes committed against NAs, the continual theft and disposession, the broken and breaking treaties, the inadequate food, shelter, healthcare, education, physical security that exist. Deal with it that someone has a perspective you don’t know about.

  178. Rebecca

    “I’m pretty sure the reservations where your alleged family lives don’t have secret police banging on their doors at 2 AM to take people away for having said a joke about the government. Pretty sure they don’t come with their own political prisons as well.”

    What a frightfully ignorant thing to say.

    Clearly you aren’t aware of the fact that native children were routinely taken away from their parents for nothing other than being native and taken to ‘schools’ that were basically prisons (they were beaten if they tried to escape in addition to generally being treated as not human) so that they could be ‘educated’ and assimilated into white culture. That’s just one aspect of the atrocities perpetrated against Indians/Native Americans in the U.S.

    As for the ‘alleged’ part of your comment on pheeno’s experience and history, come on. In addition to the fact that your own story could be false just as easily as hers, it’s appalling that you would call into question the truth of someone’s experience of oppression and marginalization (that is certainly part of a widespread pattern against people of her race/ethnicity) to make a cheap point.

  179. Jezebella

    Soopermouse, “alleged” family? REALLY? You’re calling into question Pheeno’s first-hand knowledge of reservation life based on ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER? That’s sooper-shitty and pretty fucking hostile. You expect everyone to take your assertions to be pure solid-gold truth but then don’t believe an actual Cherokee could possibly exist here on the internet, one who knows more about Cherokee life than YOU? Faaaack.

  180. Spiders

    Soopermouse, we can’t assume that every single random person we bump shoulders with on the internet is going to be fully informed about our specific cultural history/identity. It’s stoopid.

  181. Bird

    Soopermouse, I have to say that to insinuate that a woman of colour is lying both about her racial background and her experience is absolutely beyond the pale.

    I work in the area of sexual violence, and one thing that has led me to learn about is the horrific legacy of the Indian residential schools here in Canada. The systemic physical, emotional and sexual abuse perpetuated by those schools, combined with the intentional cultural destruction brought down on Aboriginal people by our government, has left an incredible legacy of destruction for First Nations communities in Canada. Many activists liken it to genocide, and I tend to agree. There was a specific intent to “take the Indian out of the child” and destroy entire peoples by killing their cultural legacy.

    I’ve walked on reserves and seen what people there face. You may not believe it, but Amnesty International and other organizations have recognized that Aboriginal people in Canada face deep, systemic persecution and racism, that Native women face extraordinary rates of violence, and that third-world conditions really do exist on Canadian reserves.

    So how about you take your racist, privileged attitude elsewhere. Alternately, do some real fucking research before you go attacking a member of an incredibly oppressed people.

  182. Sis

    Again, which ‘nation’.

    Which nation do you belong to that has it’s own political party? You gave a link, implying that was who you voted for.

    Sorry Bird. You can recite all the trivia you want about First Nations, that doesn’t prove what ‘colour’ any OP here is, or if she/he is indeed, native.

    I’ve enjoyed this thread jack ever so much.

  183. pheeno

    This reminds me of why many WOC feel such a disconnect with the feminist movement. We don’t get to separate being a woman and being our race. The two are tied together in ways that can’t be compartmentalized. The oppressions are meshed. I can’t be ONLY a woman or ONLY an Indian. I’m both, at the same time at all times. There’s no such thing as “women’s issues” for me, because the racial components are included. When racists say “squaw” they are including both my race and sex. When we are raped, it’s BECAUSE we are Indian as well as women.

    But that’s not supposed to be a part of my argument or perspective? I’m supposed to cut that out of me simply because YOU think so? No. People like that can go fuck themselves.

  184. Jezebella

    Sis, did you just call statistics about violence against Native women “trivia”?? Are you fucking kidding me? TRIVIA? What the hell are you doing here? Have you not read this blog AT ALL? Jesus jumped up christ, what an asshole move.

  185. incognotter

    Not to mention questioning the race of someone several Blamers know face-to-face. WTF? And not understanding that she never said a native american nation was a political party. We’re way past the point of trolling here.

  186. pheeno

    http://www.cherokee.org/Government/Default.aspx

    The Cherokee Nation is the federally recognized government of the Cherokee people and thereby has sovereign status granted by treaty and law. The seat of tribal government is the W.W. Keeler Complex near Tahlequah , Oklahoma , capital of the Cherokee Nation.

  187. Sis

    You’re being jerked by someone who has no compunction about whoring out her culture to shut down discussion.

    I don’t care what nation pheno belongs to (if). Her willingness to use native culture to shut down discussion is disgusting. Just because you’re native doesn’t make you right, or honest, or a spokesperson for all native people.

    You can post all the links and cites you want pheno, doesn’t change what you’ve done here.

    I’m a member of the Cree nation. And I don’t have much to say to someone like you Bird, who from what I see, uses native people to make your bones in politics.

  188. Jezebella

    Your alleged membership in the Cree nation is clearly irrelevant here, since you consider membership in the Cherokee nation irrelevant. Why claim it?

  189. Jill

    Well, here’s one of those threads that got away from me while I was out doing the butt-dance. I’d like to step in and clear a few things up.

    1. Is Sarah Palin, like all public women, the victim of sexist and antifeminist attacks? Yes.

    2. Is Sarah Palin a politician who unequivocally embraces the radical feminist worldview? No. Does she publicly support the liberation of women from patriarchal oppression? No. Does she support a woman’s right to an abortion? No.

    3. If you love Sarah Palin’s anti-abortion “politics,” should you consider that by expressing this love on a radical feminist blog with an explicit comments policy you are walking a fine line between “opposing viewpoint from within a radical feminist framework” and “troll”? Yes.

    4. Are Native peoples sorely oppressed in North America? Yes.

    5. Are these tiresome and bizarre ad feminam attacks encouraged by the moderator? No. Will all future comments containing hostile remarks (where “hostility” is to be determined exclusively by me) and feministier-than-thou “shame on you” crap be removed? Yes.

    Now. Carry on if you must, but keep the discussion academic. And don’t make me mad.

  190. Sis

    As far as I know, Palin hasn’t told us she does not support a woman’s right to abortion. The choice she makes for herself is just that, for herself. What we say we support: choice.

    Since Palin lives in the same world you and I do, no, she’s not living a life free from patriarchal oppression.

    Native women I know do not want to abort their children. There have been so many losses.

    Sarah Palin’s children and grandchild are First Nation.

  191. pheeno

    Her willingness to use native culture to shut down discussion is disgusting. ”

    I wasn’t shutting down discussion, FYI. My point was this : My critisism of Sarah Palin is rooted in something other than sexism, which is what’s being implied about anyone who HAS critisism of her. I’m not shutting down a discussion when that discussion has turned into me having to explain and defend my perfectly valid distrust of Palin because it’s assumed to be sexism by default. So in order for me to have to prove I’m not some Palin bashing feminist with a double standard Obama lover, I have to detail MY culture and MY experiences with the party Palin is a member of. I’m not an Obamabot, I posted who I voted for. And I posted this because there’s been a tendency to dismiss anyone with a critical word for Palin as a blind Obama loving democrat.

    And after further reflection on being placed in a default defensive position, I’m inclined to agree with 3 on Jill’s list.

  192. Hedgepig

    Jill, I love it when you’re strict with us. Although for some reason I would have preferred to call you Twisty just then. And since Dr Violet Socks went mad and started a Palin Parade over at the Smoking Lounge, you’re like, totally, my favourite radical feminist blogger ever, again.

  193. Agasaya

    This was interesting because it was written by a conservative female columnist and because it talks of the fact that we aren’t producing thinkers or self-analyzing individuals at present. Noonan’s politics aside, those are worthwhile observations being made while discussing Palin’s resignation.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124716984620819351.html

  194. delphyne

    That article is a sexist piece of crap. You’d never get a male politician treated that way. Couric’s question, which Noonan brings up again and which nobody seems to be able to let go of, sneeringly asking Palin what papers she read was an insult, no wonder Palin didn’t answer. She’s not a performing dog, she was a governor of Alaska and deserved the respect of that position that male politicians are always afforded.

    “scattered, illogical, manipulative and self-referential to the point of self-reverence”

    Yup Noonan isn’t playing off any sexist stereotypes there. Remember Obama’s fake presidential seal if we’re talking about self-reverence. Once again Palin is the whipping-girl for Obama’s real failings.

    “”I’m not wired that way,” “I’m not a quitter,” “I’m standing up for our values.” I’m, I’m, I’m.”

    Indeed how terrible to talk about yourself during an election which is basically a national job interview to persuade people to employ you. At least she didn’t write two books about herself like Obama did before he even reached high office or a national stage, taking me-me-meism to quite a new level.

    Why are women expected to always see other people’s point of view by the way? I get that kind of crap all the time because I refuse to change my mind about radical feminist principles. I find the people that expect that kind of thing from me are normally sexists and assholes to boot, so put Noonan in the sexist asshole bracket (like we didn’t know that already).

    I guess all the people who think Palin isn’t thoughtful, whatever that’s supposed to mean, are patting themselves on the back that that’s exactly what they are. If loving Obama reflected well on the narcissists because he’s everything they think they are, sneering at Palin does the same job, enabling themselves to distance themselves from everything they believe she is.

    This thread at Reclusive Leftist has produced the most interesting commentary on the hate Palin phenomenon by feminists that I’ve seen:

    http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/2009/07/04/feminists-and-the-mystery-of-sarah-palin/#comments

  195. Bird

    I’m not sure how taking time to listen to what Elders have to say, spending time with Native women leaders, supporting Aboriginal women’s marches, or doing any other such thing is me “making my bones” in politics. It’s me doing what women like Muriel Stanley Venne have asked white women to do: stand up and support Native women in their fight and not stay silent when our sisters are oppressed.

    It is true, I am a politician. What would be more responsible: attempting to understand and work for the rights of all people in my province, or ignoring the oppression of Native people? I’m not supporting Aboriginal women to win votes. The riding I am running in has a very tiny First Nations population. I give a damn about Native women’s lives because there are enough goddamn politicians our there who don’t, and I’m tired of watching Native women suffer and even die because of white people’s–including white women’s–indifference.

    And I know Pheeno is who she says she is. I’ve eaten at her table and she’s been a guest under my roof.

  196. Paige

    I just glanced back at this thread after a week or so and saw the following quote from Sis about Palin on abortion: “As far as I know, Palin hasn’t told us she does not support a woman’s right to abortion. The choice she makes for herself is just that, for herself.”

    This quote is just wrong. Palin fundamentally does not support a woman’s legal right to abortion, period (except where the woman’s life is threatened). See the links in my first comment above. Palin responded to a pointed question about when abortion should be illegal by stating, “With the exception of a doctor’s determination that the mother’s life would end if the pregnancy continued.” The question asked about rape and incest exceptions, among other legal exceptions, and Palin would not endorse them. Similarly, Palin has repeatedly stated in interviews that Roe v. Wade should be overturned, i.e. that states should be allowed to pass abortion restrictions even beyond all the restrictions we have now. That’s a view of what the law should be, not a view of the “choice she makes for herself.” This is why Palin has the strong support of Phyllis Schlafly and many anti-abortion crusaders.

    This issue is important to me, and it’s disappointing when I read people who are ostensibly on the left, like “Sis” or Violet Socks, misrepresenting Palin’s position. Yes, Palin prefers to talk more often about her “personal” opposition to abortion. But that’s just a convenient dodge. When you look carefully at her answers to the questions about when abortion should be legal, she stakes out a strong position that abortion should be illegal in all cases except to save the woman’s life.

    It’s fine with me if Palin wants to choose, for herself, never to have an abortion. But I will fight to keep her from imposing those views on the rest of us, as she tried to do with that egregious parental consent bill in Alaska.

    That bill, just to give one window into Palin’s thinking about abortion, would have had a number of effects. Minors of course usually involve their parents in major decisions like abortion, but every so often there’s a good reason why a teenager needs access to abortion without involving her parents, i.e. she’ll be beaten or kicked out of the house by her godbag parents, or she is pregnant as a result of incest. Almost no teenagers can easily find their way to a lawyer and a judge – it’s hard enough to get to a health clinic – so it’s basically up to Palin and the Alaska legislature whether these teenagers should have the right to choose, or not. Palin has made it abundantly clear where she stands. So please, Palin fans, do not try to distort that or run away from it. She likes to talk about her own choices, but her political position is that everyone must be forced by law to “choose” her way.

  197. K

    I apologize for being off-topic, and apologize again if this has already been cleared up and I missed it, but I saw it repeated several times on this page that Hugo Schwyzer is pro-life. Unless I can’t read, Hugo is no longer a pro-lifer and has been pro-choice for quite some time.

    I don’t mean to thread-jack, I’m just confused. Apologies again if this kind of comment is not appreciated in this space.

  198. Sis

    She likes to talk about her own choices, but her political position is that everyone must be forced by law to “choose” her way.

    ##

    I think we have heard your political position in this last post, loud and clear. You’re inserting your agenda into what other people say.

    I’m not a Palin “fan”. I’m against the sexism and misogynistic attacks used against her and therefore, all women, and the distortion of why radical feminists “defend” her.

  199. Hedgepig

    But, Sis, are you able to refute Paige’s claim that Palin is anti-Roe vs Wade? If not, all your claims that Palin is a feminist and that we “anti-woman feminists” who don’t think Palin is a great thing for women’s rights are simply expressing our own misogyny is just so much delusional BS.

  200. Sis

    “A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position.[1] To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1] [2]” Dickepedia

  201. Hedgepig

    Great, now you’re clear on the definition of straw man arguments maybe you’ll make them less often.

  202. delphi

    That was brave of you posting a gotcha a day after the thread died.
    Bravo

  1. Reclusive Leftist » Blog Archive » Feminists and the mystery of Sarah Palin

    [...] This is the comment I left, which I’m dragging back here to the smoking lounge for your perusal (the first bit in italics is a quote from Jill’s original post): [...]

  2. Today’s great reads « The Apostate

    [...] Paige, in comments on Twisty’s blog, goes into detail to debunk Violet Socks’s dishonest defenses of Sarah Palin. Link. [...]

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>