The Media and Palin's Gender Card

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
Wait a second here. Who the fuck do you think you are to judge me by five posts in one PWI thread, especially when most of those posts said nothing about politics, feminism, abortion or any other related subject?

I don’t think I’ve ever even posted in this forum before yesterday, but now I somehow represent the “average” liberal feminist? Aside from my pro-choice stance, you know nothing about my political views.

I can’t speak for other women (or should I say womyn?) or feminists, but I dislike Palin because she is interested in taking away women’s rights. Harming rather than helping. She is simply a right wing nut job with tits.

[/quote]

Well - when your first post in this thread consists of:

And, women like Palin make me sick.

It kinda sounds like you are sounding like a liberal feminist. Palin will be the most powerful woman in the history of the US, and you think she is somehow going to take away women’s rights.

Seems to me she is setting the bar for what women should aspire to, but you think it is going backwards wrt your rights.

But if it gets you so upset, I will refrain from referring to your statements in the future.

Walk like a duck, quack like a duck - and you are pissy because someone thinks you are a duck? Fucking amazing.

[quote]GCF wrote:
hedo wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
If like Palin’s daughter you choose not to have an abortion you, your family will be mocked and villified by feminists and their fellow traveller’s. If you really do something crazy like marry the father the contempt heaped upon you by the left will be even greater.

What? Do you actually believe this crap you are spouting? I know a lot of feminists who have children and I have never heard of feminists mocking and villifying a woman (or their family) for having a baby. Really, what are you talking about?

Feminists hate Palin because she is not liberal. If she had the same background and profile and was liberal she would be praised. Transparent to anyone who bothers to put some thought into it.

This doesn’t make any sense either. Liberals don’t like her political views. If she was liberal then yes liberals would praise her views. ?

I don’t know why I am posting a response to this.

[/quote]

I don’t know why you are posting a response either. Simply watching TV or reading a paper will give you all the evidence you need to support my statement. I suspect though your mind is already made up. Palin smear tactics ring a bell?

Liberals haven’t even started on discussing her political views. They are fixated on attacking her as a person and a woman. Your statement is an agreement with my point rather then a refutation of it.

Surely you have seen the backlash against the Obama camp and the MSM regarding this issue?

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
hedo wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Not supporting a woman’s right to choose is kind of a sticking point for most feminists <_<

Otherwise… Stewart has pwnt. Don’t care what anyone says, that was fucking hilarious.

Feminists don’t support a right to choose. They support abortion.

If like Palin’s daughter you choose not to have an abortion you, your family will be mocked and villified by feminists and their fellow traveller’s. If you really do something crazy like marry the father the contempt heaped upon you by the left will be even greater.

Feminists hate Palin because she is not liberal. If she had the same background and profile and was liberal she would be praised. Transparent to anyone who bothers to put some thought into it.

…What in the fuck are you talking about? Do you know ANY feminists? I know PLENTY that are downright DISGUSTED by abortion, but still support the right to choose.

Fuck, I’M downright disgusted with almost all cases of abortion. That doesn’t mean I’m pro-life. And I can SO draw a moral line at the first tri-mester. You wait longer than that, you didn’t “just find out”, you just chickened out (which is bull).

I believe abortion should only be used when the baby simply CAN’T be paid for (or in the obvious rape/incest/ect cases). And even then, I’d prefer adoption.

So please STFU and stop believing everything the media tells you about the feminist angle on abortion.

I have nothing wrong with Palin’s daughter being preggers. I DO have a problem with Palin pushing abstinence only education, and I think the irony is pretty funny.[/quote]

Why do you think I don’t know any feminists? I’m twice as old as you and far more accomplished in life. Do you think I may have crossed path with a feminist or two while living in NYC for 10 years? Well do you?

I would propose that if you and your feminist friends are disgusted by abortion then they should change their positions on it. It’s called courage of convictions. Do you think Palin has courage of convictions or has she simply given in to PC trends?

Perhaps as you get older you will see that the ability to pay for a baby is more a matter of selfishness on the part of the parents then anything else. Nobody thinks they can afford a baby. It may require sacrafice. Simply being able to fuck doesn’t make you a good father. Being born into unfavorable economic circumstances are not the fault of the child and should not condemn it to death.

STFU is an act of desperation in an argument, especially when you are arguing opinion.

Have the Ivy standards dropped that much young man? Try reasoning and civility. People will take you seriously.

A life can always be paid for. Sometimes just not by the people who created it.

The pro-abortion folks simply cannot keep their emotions in check because the beliefs they hold are built on a house of cards. This discussion hasn’t dispelled that opinion.

[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
Why abort the baby when you can give it up for adoption anyways? You can deal with the temporary pain, if the other option is ending a life.

[/quote]

Pregnancy = temporary pain.

Well done. Are you a 15 year old boy perchance?

[quote]hedo wrote:

Why do you think I don’t know any feminists?
[/quote]

It could be because you made sweeping generalizations that don’t much match reality, just a guess though.

[quote]GCF wrote:
rainjack wrote:
The term “feminist” has been co-opted by the left. You can’t be a feminist and be conservative. It goes against the rules of Gloria Steinem, HG Brown.

They are treating Palin in much the same way that Clarence Thomas was treated, and to a large extent still is.

You can’t be conservative and out perform the liberal standard whether you are a white, female conservative, or a black, male conservative.

The militant feminists (feminazis, to steal from Rush) absolutely hate everything Palin stands for.

Just look for some of Buckeye girls posts in the political forum. I’m not saying she is a militant feminist, but she echos the opinion of most liberal feminists.

So yeah, hedo is way more right than wrong on this.

So hedo is right: feminists villify women and their families for choosing to have babies. Wow. Talking about making up facts to support your view. I really find it hard to believe you ACTUALLY belive that. Maybe I give you too much credit.

[/quote]

This board has some extremely loud mouthed right wingers who pride themselves on incivility. The echo chamber gets pretty loud sometimes and you’ll get people making absurd, extreme arguments without batting an eye or realizing they sound like kooks.

[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
Why bring men into this? They know very well if you where to keep a baby, they would be paying out their ass for the next 18 years.
[/quote]

Is that so? Is that why so many get away without paying a dime, ever? It’s pretty damn hard to force people to pay child support.

Not only that, but in no way does paying child support equal raising a child.

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
hedo wrote:

Why do you think I don’t know any feminists?

It could be because you made sweeping generalizations that don’t much match reality, just a guess though. [/quote]

Bad guess then. Take a look at what some of them have been saying about Palin.

[quote]hedo wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
hedo wrote:

Why do you think I don’t know any feminists?

It could be because you made sweeping generalizations that don’t much match reality, just a guess though.

Bad guess then. Take a look at what some of them have been saying about Palin.

[/quote]

You don’t understand, hedo - you are a right winger. A kook. You don’t pride yourself in having your nuts gored from riding the fence. You are a loud mouthed, uneducated buffoon.

GL is the new vroom. All he needs is a thinking tree.

[quote]hedo wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
hedo wrote:

Why do you think I don’t know any feminists?

It could be because you made sweeping generalizations that don’t much match reality, just a guess though.

Bad guess then. Take a look at what [b]some of them[b] have been saying about Palin.

[/quote]

You know what a generalization is, right?

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Christine wrote:
…I agree with you here. I like everyone so much and then I read what these uber-conservatives think and it makes me cringe…

I know this is an incredibly bizarre revelation but it’s possible that many uber-conservatives here like everyone so much and then they read what these uber-liberals think and it makes them cringe…

I know, I know. It is simply incredible that on this map of our simple little existence on this planet that there are so many two-way streets.[/quote]

Yep.

That’s why I don’t discuss politics with certain people. I would end up disliking those whose company I might otherwise enjoy.

The uber-conservatives make me cringe more than the uber-liberals though… although both are cringe worthy.

[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
Why bring men into this? They know very well if you where to keep a baby, they would be paying out their ass for the next 18 years.

[/quote]

Why bring men into this? Because they are just as responsible for that life as a woman is.

You’re assuming that the child support will be paid. And what you fail to realize is that no amount of money can raise a child. Money doesn’t provide emotional support. Money doesn’t change a dirty diaper. Money doesn’t take a kid to school, or check his math homework. Money doesn’t stay up all night with a sick child or fussy baby.

[quote]Molotov_Coktease wrote:
GCF wrote:
pushharder wrote:
GCF wrote:
rainjack wrote:
The term “feminist” has been co-opted by the left. You can’t be a feminist and be conservative. It goes against the rules of Gloria Steinem, HG Brown.

They are treating Palin in much the same way that Clarence Thomas was treated, and to a large extent still is.

You can’t be conservative and out perform the liberal standard whether you are a white, female conservative, or a black, male conservative.

The militant feminists (feminazis, to steal from Rush) absolutely hate everything Palin stands for.

Just look for some of Buckeye girls posts in the political forum. I’m not saying she is a militant feminist, but she echos the opinion of most liberal feminists.

So yeah, hedo is way more right than wrong on this.

So hedo is right: feminists villify women and their families for choosing to have babies. Wow. Talking about making up facts to support your view. I really find it hard to believe you ACTUALLY belive that. Maybe I give you too much credit.

I guess I have never met a feminist then. Although I took a political science paper in University (called Gender in Politics) taken by two well known feminist writers. I had a great time in that paper and got on well with both lecturers and had some great debates with them. I wrote an essay that got a very high mark despite me completely disagreeing with them.

The class had about 60 students in it. I was one of 4 males. I was hated by many of the students. There were a lot of angry lesbians in there. The male bashing was intense sometimes but not once did I hear negative comments against women having children and husbands.

Both of the lecturers had husbands and children.

So I take it you are saying these two individuals are the norm, not an exception?

Yes, certainly in my experience. These two plus were just an exaample but the rest of that specific class (in fact feminists in all classes I have taken), plus the writings I read in that class and a couple of others I can honestly say I have never ever heard/read a feminist mock/villify a woman for having children or husbands.

Have the majority of feminists you have dealt with/read ever villified women and their families for having children?

The so called exception to the rule can be staring them in the face and they’d never know it. They are very quick fingered with the lefty liberal femi-nazi stamp. If they ever paid attention instead of plugging their ears and crying femi-nazi and worrying over the world contracting vagina dentata and eating them whole, they’d know that some of us do not lean to the left nearly as far as would make it convenient for them.

I have posted on this board, whole threads picking apart leftist positions, my belief system falls in line with Libertarians more than anything else. Liberal? Not a chance. Just ask my two brothers, staunch supporters of Obama…how liberal I am when they call and rail at me for having the sheer audacity, as a woman of an under-privelaged background, to be unwilling to cast a vote in his direction. It makes for a wearisome fight to be told that I achieved what I have in life, not because of the choices I’ve made in the face of adversity, or my intelligence, but because I am ‘white and pretty’. Makes the meat at the family barbecue taste like a combination of shit and guilt.

The abortion issue is discussed on this board every other week. Same opinions, same hamster wheel…same stalemate. I am still pro-choice. I have never villified Sarah Palin, or women with families and children. Being pro-choice does not make me anti-family or children. It doesn’t make me a frothy mouthed combat boot wearing liberal either. I don’t want Roe V Wade overturned, but I don’t want to slide headlong down the baseline of impending socialism either.

I can’t bat for either team without wanting to tear the number off my back and kick dirt at the umpires. To the left, I don’t want phony promises of reform based on entitlement or undue leniency regarding foreign policy and immigration disguised as diplomacy. To the right, I don’t want your religious sanctimony vomited all over my life or war mongering based on profit. I won’t vote for greed. I won’t vote for entitlement. Both sides are well and truly pissing in the face of this country. Both claiming rights to the true meaning of patriotism while deviating so far from the well worn but forgotten path it makes me sick.

I want a real candidate. Not a batch of blowhards, and not a bunch of panderers. Too much to ask, but then again…like I said, I like having choices. Right, now I have to go make dinner for my family and prepare for work tomorrow, then send my donation to planned parenthood and make sure my date to go shooting at Montana Hawk tomorrow is still on. Happy pigeonholing!

[/quote]

I agree completely with this, and I would also describe myself as someone with libertarian leanings. America needs to end its love affair with the two party false paradigm if it ever wants to solve its many problems. Alas, this won’t be happening anytime soon. The republicans are just as bad as the democrats, because they are both rife with corruption and they are both controlled by corporate interests.

As for the Hobson’s choice that the American public will have to face in November; I do think McCain is slightly worse than Obama, because of his neocon views and foreign policy, which would drive this nation in to bankruptcy and ruination faster than anything Obama could come up with.

At the end of the day, anyone who votes for McCain needs to have their head examined, and anyone who votes for McCain just because he’s the republican nominee needs to be committed…anyone who votes for McCain because of who his running mate is, needs to be lobotomized if they are not already. (even if they are just concerned about the geriatric’s health problems and who might become president if he croaks in office.)

[quote]Tayto wrote:

As for the Hobson’s choice that the American public will have to face in November; I do think McCain is slightly worse than Obama, because of his neocon views and foreign policy, which would drive this nation in to bankruptcy and ruination faster than anything Obama could come up with.
[/quote]

I completely disagree with this. It is not what Obama would do the ruin the nation. It is what Obama/Pelosi/Reid would do the ruin the nation. If McCain is elected the Dems can keep his potential war mongering in check. If Obama is elected, there is noone to keep his spending and taxing in check. Scary.

[quote]Molotov_Coktease wrote:
GCF wrote:
pushharder wrote:
GCF wrote:
rainjack wrote:
The term “feminist” has been co-opted by the left. You can’t be a feminist and be conservative. It goes against the rules of Gloria Steinem, HG Brown.

They are treating Palin in much the same way that Clarence Thomas was treated, and to a large extent still is.

You can’t be conservative and out perform the liberal standard whether you are a white, female conservative, or a black, male conservative.

The militant feminists (feminazis, to steal from Rush) absolutely hate everything Palin stands for.

Just look for some of Buckeye girls posts in the political forum. I’m not saying she is a militant feminist, but she echos the opinion of most liberal feminists.

So yeah, hedo is way more right than wrong on this.

So hedo is right: feminists villify women and their families for choosing to have babies. Wow. Talking about making up facts to support your view. I really find it hard to believe you ACTUALLY belive that. Maybe I give you too much credit.

I guess I have never met a feminist then. Although I took a political science paper in University (called Gender in Politics) taken by two well known feminist writers. I had a great time in that paper and got on well with both lecturers and had some great debates with them. I wrote an essay that got a very high mark despite me completely disagreeing with them.

The class had about 60 students in it. I was one of 4 males. I was hated by many of the students. There were a lot of angry lesbians in there. The male bashing was intense sometimes but not once did I hear negative comments against women having children and husbands.

Both of the lecturers had husbands and children.

So I take it you are saying these two individuals are the norm, not an exception?

Yes, certainly in my experience. These two plus were just an exaample but the rest of that specific class (in fact feminists in all classes I have taken), plus the writings I read in that class and a couple of others I can honestly say I have never ever heard/read a feminist mock/villify a woman for having children or husbands.

Have the majority of feminists you have dealt with/read ever villified women and their families for having children?

The so called exception to the rule can be staring them in the face and they’d never know it. They are very quick fingered with the lefty liberal femi-nazi stamp. If they ever paid attention instead of plugging their ears and crying femi-nazi and worrying over the world contracting vagina dentata and eating them whole, they’d know that some of us do not lean to the left nearly as far as would make it convenient for them.

I have posted on this board, whole threads picking apart leftist positions, my belief system falls in line with Libertarians more than anything else. Liberal? Not a chance. Just ask my two brothers, staunch supporters of Obama…how liberal I am when they call and rail at me for having the sheer audacity, as a woman of an under-privelaged background, to be unwilling to cast a vote in his direction. It makes for a wearisome fight to be told that I achieved what I have in life, not because of the choices I’ve made in the face of adversity, or my intelligence, but because I am ‘white and pretty’. Makes the meat at the family barbecue taste like a combination of shit and guilt.

The abortion issue is discussed on this board every other week. Same opinions, same hamster wheel…same stalemate. I am still pro-choice. I have never villified Sarah Palin, or women with families and children. Being pro-choice does not make me anti-family or children. It doesn’t make me a frothy mouthed combat boot wearing liberal either. I don’t want Roe V Wade overturned, but I don’t want to slide headlong down the baseline of impending socialism either.

I can’t bat for either team without wanting to tear the number off my back and kick dirt at the umpires. To the left, I don’t want phony promises of reform based on entitlement or undue leniency regarding foreign policy and immigration disguised as diplomacy. To the right, I don’t want your religious sanctimony vomited all over my life or war mongering based on profit. I won’t vote for greed. I won’t vote for entitlement. Both sides are well and truly pissing in the face of this country. Both claiming rights to the true meaning of patriotism while deviating so far from the well worn but forgotten path it makes me sick.

I want a real candidate. Not a batch of blowhards, and not a bunch of panderers. Too much to ask, but then again…like I said, I like having choices. Right, now I have to go make dinner for my family and prepare for work tomorrow, then send my donation to planned parenthood and make sure my date to go shooting at Montana Hawk tomorrow is still on. Happy pigeonholing!

[/quote]

Excellent post.

[quote]dhickey wrote:
Tayto wrote:

As for the Hobson’s choice that the American public will have to face in November; I do think McCain is slightly worse than Obama, because of his neocon views and foreign policy, which would drive this nation in to bankruptcy and ruination faster than anything Obama could come up with.

I completely disagree with this. It is not what Obama would do the ruin the nation. It is what Obama/Pelosi/Reid would do the ruin the nation. If McCain is elected the Dems can keep his potential war mongering in check. If Obama is elected, there is noone to keep his spending and taxing in check. Scary.[/quote]

Pelosi and the dems haven’t done much to keep Cheney and Bush in check since they took control of the congress; which by the way, is no longer a co-equal branch of the government thanks to the ‘special powers’ given to the office of president by Bush and his cohorts. (Which it turns out, are quite useful if you’re a war mongering president).

The status quo would not change under McCain.

Personally speaking, I would prefer the US to go bankrupt because of Obama’s wishy washy social projects (that would at least benefit some people)…OVER bankruptcy due to McCain’s useless wars and the deaths of US servicemen in foreign lands…that would only benefit a tiny select elite.

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
Why bring men into this? They know very well if you where to keep a baby, they would be paying out their ass for the next 18 years.

Why bring men into this? Because they are just as responsible for that life as a woman is.

You’re assuming that the child support will be paid. And what you fail to realize is that no amount of money can raise a child. Money doesn’t provide emotional support. Money doesn’t change a dirty diaper. Money doesn’t take a kid to school, or check his math homework. Money doesn’t stay up all night with a sick child or fussy baby. [/quote]

gee, then maybe you (not specifically you) should of kept your legs closed. Biology is a bitch, isn’t it?

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
Why abort the baby when you can give it up for adoption anyways? You can deal with the temporary pain, if the other option is ending a life.

Pregnancy = temporary pain.

Well done. Are you a 15 year old boy perchance? [/quote]

Once the bab is out, it’s out. End.

Aren’t you the guy who whined about hot weightrooms?

[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
buckeye girl wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
Why bring men into this? They know very well if you where to keep a baby, they would be paying out their ass for the next 18 years.

Why bring men into this? Because they are just as responsible for that life as a woman is.

You’re assuming that the child support will be paid. And what you fail to realize is that no amount of money can raise a child. Money doesn’t provide emotional support. Money doesn’t change a dirty diaper. Money doesn’t take a kid to school, or check his math homework. Money doesn’t stay up all night with a sick child or fussy baby.

gee, then maybe you should of kept your legs closed. Biology is a bitch, isn’t it?[/quote]

Lol! You should learn the meaning of irony…

Do you have the capacity to bear children?No?
See,biology really is a bitch.Just not in the way you thought.