Sarah Palin is a threat to free women
I have opinions of these "feminists" which I will refrain from writing. What I will say is that I will not be bullied into defending women who will destroy my own freedom. There is a whole bunch of women on the web ( some who are men posing as women)who urge feminist to just get over abortion because it excludes "many" women, women like Carrie Prejean and Sarah Palin. These men in woman's voices tell us that we should not object to pharmacists who refuse to fill birth control perscriptions or the morning after pill and who humiliate women who come to have their perscriptions filled.
Web feminists urge us to defend all women when they are attacked. Even those powerful women who will destroy other women's freedom. Because these "feminists" think women can be demigodded to act against their own interest FOR the interests of the elite's wolves in sheep clothing.
I have limited funds and energy. Phyllis Shaffely is funded to the tune of over hundreds of thousands of dollars by wealthy Conservatives - let Shaffley use their money to defend Palin. I am not being paid to do it. I will defend the woman of Iran instead of poor Palin. Just because they play the woman victim card does not mean intelligent women will Sig heil and salute our enemies.
On an I blame the Patriarchy thread "Pheenobarbie" and "Paige" made comments I want to preserve forever on this blog -- then I can just give this cite which contains Sarah Palin's views in her own writing.
Then, I will just give a link to this page the next time I hear someone ask us to disbelieve what we see with our own eyes when we look at the Palin family; their hypocrisy, their religion, their lack of compassion for any species except fetuses, their typical "breed recklessly for Jesus even if you are a child" so called morality, and most of all, their failure to teach their own child to prevent reproduction while a teenager. It is nauseating to listen to this failing child seek to regain her self worth by lying to other children so they also get pregnant. That is what free women will get from Sarah Palin defense.
Right now there are only about 1,500 abortion clinics open in the US and they are under constant threat. Most states have enacted expensive, humiliating, regulations and restrictions on the procedures. State attorneys are harassing doctors with lawsuits, which is a reason to defeat republican and democrat anti abortion state attorneys. As a woman who had a butcher abortion when it was illegal and watched my friends butchered, who saw women bear children they did not want or wanted only to trap a male into economic support and who also witnessed a woman die from her own self induced abortion, I agree with this next comment.
July 3, 2009 at 9:23 am
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.
July 4, 2009 at 11:25 pm
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
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?
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.
2. Will you support the right of parents to opt out their children from curricula, books, classes, or surveys, which parents consider privacy-invading or offensive to their religion or conscience?
SP: Yes. Parents should have the ultimate control over what their children are taught. (and this means birth control education kiddies)
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.
HERE IS A DECENT THREAD ON SARAH PALIN THANKS TO UPPITY WOMAN, AND GREAT CAT VIDEOS TOO!