I admit it, call me crazy, but I was utterly charmed by Governor Sarah Palin which is to say that, despite her beauty, her smiles, and her humor, I saw that she was also Annie Oakley-deadly and no man’s pushover; indeed, I would not mess with her. (Well, did you think this veteran feminist would be charmed by a woman because she is a lightweight?)
After all, Palin represents a state that gave women the right to vote in 1912–New York State enfranchised women in 1917; a state in which women like Libby Riddles and Susan Butcher have won the incredibly difficult dog sled race known as the Iditarod. Butcher won it three times in a row–something that no man has ever done. The race covers 1,161 miles of Alaskan wilderness and the racer, known as a “musher,” often faces 100 mile an hour winds, blizzards, wild animals, thin ice, avalanches, snow blindness, and sleep deprivation.
As I said, although Palin may not come from either the urban east or west coasts of America, this does not mean she is a lightweight. Folks: She’s an iconoclast and a reformer who (now, here’s a Newsflash for you), did not endorse President George Bush in 2000. She endorsed Steve Forbes in 1996 and 2000.
However, the minute she closed her mouth–literally–Palin was subjected to allegations of “fraud” or “witchcraft.” Precisely because she was so sensational at the RNC, media commentators, on both sides of the aisle, shockingly pointed out that Palin’s speech had been written for her and thus, might not really express her own ideas and thus, might not count. Her success was not exactly real, it was only an enchanting performance. Of course, all political speeches are written for the candidates, both male and female, although the candidates also help shape them and sometimes rewrite them. Do they really think that Senators Obama, Biden, or McCain do not have speechwriters? Does Obama’s rock concert-like performance not count as one? Oh, shades of Hillary Clinton–methinks it’s a woman running for high public office.
The mainstream media and the blogosphere challenged her personally, not politically, and they went on and on about whether Palin was the mother or the grandmother of her “special needs” youngest son, Trig; whether she ever bothered to stay home long enough to teach “abstinence” to her seventeen-year-old pregnant daughter Bristol, etc. See Here and Here for some coverage of the media coverage.
Seven days after her candidacy was announced, a concerted feminist attack on both the East and West coasts was unleashed against Palin. Judith Warner, who has a blog at the New York Times, wrote as follows: “It turns out there was something more nauseating than the nomination of Sarah Palin…It was the tone of the acclaim that followed her acceptance speech.” To be fair, Warner, who once interviewed me about my book Woman’s Inhumanity to Woman, understands that some women may perhaps vote as a function of “Is she like me or not like me? If she’s not like me, can I like her?” But Warner concludes her article by saying that “We’re not likely to get a worthy female president anytime soon.”
And, on the same day, my old friend Gloria Steinem wrote a piece in the Los Angeles Times. Gloria has always been a decent and gracious woman, but she is also a hard-core Democratic Party operative. Her piece is titled: Palin: wrong woman, wrong message. To her credit, Steinem rejected the personal attacks on Palin and then proceeded to attack her politically.
Steinem wrote that “Palin opposes just about every issue that women support,” and goes on to list just what those issues are: Creationism (a belief in God and/or a belief that God created the world in seven days) and the right to learn about this right alongside classes about evolution; A disbelief in “global warming” (as if this is a “belief” right up there with a belief in God); “opposition to gun control” but support for “government control of women’s wombs.”
Ah, the abortion issue, always, only, the abortion issue. We fought hard for that right, and we have been forced to continue fighting for it. I don’t agree with the Right to Life position but I can work with someone whether or not we agree on this hot-button issue. All those feminists who believe that we can work with tyrants and misogynists surely should be able to work with those who oppose abortion. Yes? No?
But, prithee pause: Many women voters share Palin’s beliefs, including some feminists. In fact, some feminists are still in shock over the Democratic Party’s mistreatment of Hillary and of women. Some have vowed to write in Hillary’s name or to vote for McCain. Steinem is plenty worried about them because she appeals to this group specifically. She writes: “To vote in protest for McCain/Palin would be like saying: “Somebody stole my shoes, so I’ll amputate my legs.”
Marcia Pappas, the President of New York State NOW just sent around a funny but painful piece in which she compares women who love abusive men to women who love abusive political parties. She is specifically thinking of the Democratic Party. Of course, Pappas wanted Hillary. (With Pappas’s permission, I have reproduced that article at the end of my own piece. It is titled: To: Women Who Love Their Political Party Too Much.” )
I bet that Obama is sorry he did not pick Hillary as his Vice President and I bet the Democratic Party is even sorrier they did not find a way to have both Hillary and Barack. Sending Hillary out to attract the woman’s vote on Obama’s behalf–that’s not good enough.
Bloggers and journalists have either created or passed along an incredible number of large lies about Palin. Some bloggers–right here at Pajamas–and some mainstream media (CNN for starters), have also done some fact-checking.
For my part, I have been researching Palin’s record for a few days now. Funny, but her position on women’s issues is not all that clear. My guess is that Palin might be pretty good on some issues that are crucial to women. What I’m about to suggest will be considered heretical. Why? Because I am absolutely willing to talk about women’s issues without placing abortion dead-center.
I have worked with some Christian conservatives who are anti-abortion but who are, nevertheless, pro-woman. Interestingly, they have sometimes taken pro-woman stands that are, in my view, even more radical in certain areas than those taken by secular feminists. Indeed, I have found that religious people can also be profoundly pro-woman. Feminism cannot be defined only by secularists or only by one political party.
If Palin is a Law and Order candidate then she might be good on the issue of domestic violence; rape; incest; child pedophiles; and sexual harassment. I don’t know, I’m not sure, she has no record in these areas. I would love to hear her talk about these issues. If Palin is a Law and Order kinda gal, then she’d also be good on the issue of trafficking/sexual slavery; pornography; and prostitution.
These are all woman’s issues and feminist issues too.
Further, I bet Palin strongly opposes Jihad, Islamism, terrorism, and therefore Islamic gender apartheid. Palin might actually be willing to risk being called an “Islamophobe” in order to take some radical steps to ensure that Islamic gender apartheid does not further penetrate the West. I am talking about face-veiling, female genital cutting, arranged marriage, polygamy, honor killings, etc.
I would like to know where Governor Palin stands on these issues. I am sure they will –and should–come up in her debate with Senator Biden who sponsored the Violence Against Women Act.
Further, I would like to know where Palin stands on the issue of equal pay for equal work and on the Equal Rights Amendment. As a mother with a helpful husband, what programs would Palin support for mothers whose husbands are ill, have died, have lost their jobs, or who have abandoned their families? What about mothers without husbands altogether? What are Palin’s views about the rights of mothers/primary caretakers and of dependent children? George Bush-era Republicans cut many services to families in crisis. Do McCain and Palin plan to continue in this sad and sorry way or do they have some new ideas?
Feminist groups would be very short-sighted indeed to alienate Palin or to write her off as McCain’s “unqualified” pick before she makes her views on such issues known.
On Sunday, Sept. 7th, Tammy Bruce became the first feminist to open her heart publicly to Governor Palin. Today, I join her in the pages of Pajamas Media.
I will be writing about Senator McCain, separately, in the future.
Marcia Pappas’ Letter:
To: Women Who Love Their Political Party Too Much
By NOW-NYS President Marcia Pappas
September 9th, 2008
Many years ago, I read a book called “Women Who Love too Much: When You Keep Wishing and Hoping He’ll Change” by Robin Norwood. It’s a book to help women look at why they might find it difficult to leave unhealthy relationships. So I got to thinking, what if we exchanged “men” for “the party?” I have often used this analogy when talking about my feelings and to explain why women have such difficulty holding their “party” accountable for its actions.
In the women’s movement, we often say the personal is political. For as long as I can remember, I’ve known that abusive relationships can extend beyond our personal relationships with individuals into our political lives. So let’s re-read Women Who Love Too Much, substituting “the party” for “men.” It will show the dynamics of some current events, so I urge you to take this test I send, with love and a desire to empower women. Women inside and outside the women’s movement, please ask yourself these questions:
1. Do you find yourself attracted again and again to a troubled, distant, party?
2. Do you obsess over a party that is emotionally unavailable, addicted to power, money, alcohol, or other women?
3. Do you neglect your friends and your own interests, your ethics, and ideals to be immediately available to the party?
4. Do you feel empty without the party, even though being with it is torment?
If you answer yes to any of these questions, please continue. If not, continue anyway. Maybe you can help another suffering sister who needs to break away from a dysfunctional party.
Why do so many women become obsessed with a political party that is emotionally unavailable, addicted to work, alcohol, or other women, a party that cannot love them back with laws to support women’s rights?
Women inside and outside the women’s movement need recognize the roots of our destructive patterns. These symptoms can apply to men as well as women and Republicans as well as Democrats. However experience shows me that more women than men suffer from this syndrome. Be truthful with yourself. Do you fit this description?
1. You come from a dysfunctional society in which your emotional needs were not met. (Women grow up in a patriarchal society that devalues everything we do).
2. Having received little real nurturing, validation, or encouragement to be yourself, you try to fill this unmet need vicariously by becoming a care-giver, a champion especially to a party that appears to be, in some way, needy.
3. Because you were never able to change the culture into a society of supportive, caring society that believes in the true equality, you respond deeply to the familiar type of emotionally unavailability that you can change through love and devotion.
4. Terrified of abandonment, i.e. losing the Supreme Court, you will do anything to keep the relationship from dissolving. Women have been duped by the party; and some feel they’ve nowhere else to go.
5. Almost nothing is too much trouble, takes too much time, or is too expensive if it will help the party with which you are involved.
6. Accustomed to lack of respect in a patriarchal, misogynist society, you are willing to wait, hope, and try harder to please the party.
7. You are willing to take far more than fifty percent of the responsibility, guilt, and blame for the failures inside and outside the party.
8. Your self esteem is critically low, and deep inside you do not believe you deserve to be happy. Rather, you believe you must earn the right to enjoy life. You are convinced that you can earn that joy by submitting to whatever the party wants, even if it means supporting unqualified candidates or trading off one civil right off for another. In other words, you are subservient.
9. Having experienced little security in life, you have a desperate need to control your party. You mask as “being helpful” your efforts to control people and situations.
10. In a relationship with the party, you are much more in touch with your dream of how it could be than with the reality of how it is.
11. You are addicted to men in the party and to the emotional pain they inflict. It’s all you know. After all, women have been hurt by patriarchy since birth.
12. You may be predisposed emotionally and often bio chemically to addiction to drugs, alcohol, and/or certain foods, particularly sugary ones. This is the reason so many women have “body image” issues that lead to obesity, anorexia, or bulimia.
13. By being drawn to a party with problems that need fixing, or by being enmeshed in situations that are chaotic, uncertain, and emotionally painful, you avoid focusing on your responsibility to yourself and to the issues you espouse.
14. You may have a tendency toward episodes of depression (the outcome of living in a patriarchal, misogynistic society that has oppressed you for your entire life), which you try to forestall through the excitement provided by an unstable relationship with the party.
15. You are not attracted to any political party that is kind, stable, reliable, and interested in you and the issues you support. You find such political parties to be boring.
What does this test say to you about you and your relationship with your party? You decide. Is it time to leave the party, or will you stay and keep wishing and hoping they will change?
PJM Home
Woman's Inhumanity to Woman
The Death of Feminism: What’s Next in the Struggle for Women’s Freedom
Women and Madness
The New Anti-Semitism: The Current Crisis and What We Must Do About It
Women of the Wall: Claiming Sacred Ground at Judaism’s Holy Site
Letters to a Young Feminist
With Child: A Diary of Motherhood
Feminist Foremothers in Women’s Studies, Psychology, and Mental Health
Patriarchy: Notes of an Expert Witness
Sacred Bond: The Legacy of Baby M
Mothers on Trial: The Battle for Children and Custody
About Men
Women, Money & Power
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
91 Comments
1. George Jochnowitz:Whatever happened to the Buchanan question? Does one wear a Buchanan-for-President button simply as an act of courtesy?
Sep 9, 2008 - 2:56 pm 2. Gianni:Ms. Chesler,
I am a free-lance journalist from Italy.
Would you accept an interview for the italian press?
I hope you would answer me in the forum or using my personal mail.
Kind regards from Italy
Sep 9, 2008 - 2:58 pm 3. George Jochnowitz:Caro Gianni,
Ho scritto alcuni articoli su Primo Levi, Phyllis Chesler e altri soggetti che Lei puo trovare su http://www.jochnowitz.net
Distinti saluti,
Sep 9, 2008 - 4:16 pm 4. Marion L:Giorgio
Dear Dr. Chesler:
Your references to Alaskan history are irrelevant to Sarah Palin’s qualifications to be vice president of the United States. I’m delighted that Alaskan women gained the right to vote in 1912, but that does nothing to eradicate international human rights abuses (including gender apartheid) and domestic civil liberties violations in 2008. Libby Riddles and Susan Butcher are inspiring athletes. However, they are not running for vice president. Sarah Palin is.
Ms. Palin’s votes for Steve Forbes do not make her “an iconoclast” and “a reformer.” Forbes’ right of center views and free market fundamentalism were tiresome variations of long held Republican bromides.
Bush/Cheney has offered more of the same and McCain/Palin promises to offer more of the same.
Moreover, Sarah Palin is not “a law and order candidate.” The Constitution of the United States is the basis for law and order in the United States, and Ms. Palin’s views reveal that she is unqualified to enforce it.
In her RNC speech, Sarah Palin voiced contempt for Democrats who wish to uphold the Constitution by “reading . . .rights” to Guantanamo detainees. Thus, it appears that she implicitly endorses the Eighth Amendment violations that prevail at Guantanamo every day.
Sarah Palin has said nothing about the disgraceful arrests of journalists who covered demonstrations outside of the RNC. If she is “a law and order candidate” then why has she remained silent about this blatant First Amendment violation? (In my view, Democrats have not said enough about this either.)
Sarah Palin is entitled to her private views about God and the universe. However, she is not entitled to mandate the teaching of creationism in public schools. That would be a violation of the First Amendment, and further evidence that she is not “a law and order candidate.”
Finally, Sarah Palin revealed her own tenuous understanding of American history (and contempt for people who made enormous sacrifices for equal rights under the law) by disparging community organizers in the name of aiming a cheap shot at Barack Obama.
Sep 9, 2008 - 4:21 pm 5. Alex Grobman:Once again you have done a great service to all Americans. This time by dispelling a myth about Sarah Palin. Her treatment in the media is an outrage. At a time when we are at war with Islamic terrorists, when the Russians are occupying parts of Georgia and are stirring up trouble elsewhere in the world including Iran, when elements of the economy are faltering, and our health care is in need of repair, all the “elite” media can focus on is Sarah Palin.
Sarah Palin is a far stronger supporter for Israel than Obama is. His advisers are Daniel C. Kurtzer who believes Israel has to make concessions for peace, and Dennis Ross who is not much better. Their view is a misreading of the nature of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Oslo was a non-starter from the beginning. That should have been obvious, but not to them
Joe Biden is not much better. Ask Daniel Pipes or Mort Klein of the ZOA, how Biden believes Israel must bend to American wishes on Israel or else. Biden said so at a ZOA dinner several years ago in Phildelephia.
From two sources, I heard Palin believes protecting the Jewish state is essential because it is in the best interests of the U.S. to do so and because she sees it as a religious imperative.
We live in an imperfect world. Given the choices we have, voting for McCain and Palin is a no brainer.
Alex Grobman, Ph.D. historian.
Sep 9, 2008 - 4:23 pm 6. Norman Simms:Dear Phyllis
Thanks as always for your powerful and clarifying words, this time about Sarah Palin.
From way down here in New Zealand, her speech came across as a refreshing voice of common sense and hard-nosed realism. What the press could only call “sarcasm”, was in my view witty, insightful and “liberal” in the old European sense (as opposed to religious, monarchical and feudal). Her delivery was also wonderful, including the way she put her whole family in the face of the very stupid and hostile media–stupid because they are stupified by St Barak and hostile because they long-since made up their minds about who in the world counts (the criminal classes and the anti-democratic nations).
I think her message came across, and the polls are showing that she has opened a window and let in fresh air. It’s bad enough the press and other media go after George W. Bush as a village idiot, missing out all his very wise speeches, and dismissing him as a fundamentalist fanatic, wher he carefully avoids all specific mythical and cultic terms.
Though the election will probably go to the Democrats because of the electoral college system, McCain and Palin will give them a run for the money–and shock the media.
Norman
Sep 9, 2008 - 4:44 pm 7. Pam:I always thought of feminism as a woman’s right to choose to be her own woman. To control her own life and her own destiny. I never thought of feminism as being tied to some political party, or some political agenda, or some part of a political agenda, like abortion.
It is patronizing, condescending, belittling, and insulting when some woman or group of women claim to “speak for women.” I have never seen a woman who “speaks for me.” I am quite capable of thinking and speaking for myself. Most women are. Women are much tougher, smarter, stronger, and more capable than anyone in the Democrat party seems to believe. That party has become as hidebound with rules for female thinking and behavior as 1950s suburbia. And the punishment is just as swift if the woman deviates in the slightest.
Sarah Palin is her own woman. She makes her own choices and her own decisions and doesn’t ask anyone’s permission or opinion on a decision that is hers and hers alone to make. I like her. My hat is off to her. She is tough and smart AND she is pretty and charming in the bargain.
Sep 9, 2008 - 6:46 pm 8. iammefrommiami:re: making abortion THE issue- All other feminist issues such as rape, child molestation, poverty, slavery, honor killings, genital mutilation, etc. can or do happen to men as well as women. ONLY a woman can be forced to die in childbirth , only a woman can be forcibly impregnated , only a woman can be forced to give birth and only a woman can be forced to have an abortion .
furthermore I recently read on LGF that the GOP position on abortion, like the Catholic position, does not make exception for the life of the woman (correct me if I am wrong). For a Jewish person to support such a position is clearly against halacha nu?
no good can come from such a sell out
Sep 9, 2008 - 8:08 pm 9. Pajamas Media » Sarah Palin is a Feminist Issue:[...] Read the entire piece here. [...]
Sep 10, 2008 - 4:45 am 10. TomJW:Deja vu, it’s like we are back in the time of the rape president again.
Sep 10, 2008 - 4:53 am 11. Ed Wallis:Dear “iammefrommiami,”
It could be that the thread got eliminate BEFORE you had the time to respond to my question, so here’s a great opportunity:
Since you mention that being Jewish is in part a reason for your support for Obama,
how do you reconcile your support with Obama’s “endorsement” by Farrakhan, Hamas and other Middle-East terrorist organizations?
Also, since the other thread got eliminated so quickly, perhaps you didn’t have the chance to read my note the Gov. Palin has an (albeit small) Israeli flag behind her desk in her office, so how do you reconcile this with your claims of her being anti-Israel?
Sorry, but it seems to me that you and “Marion L.” are hardly more than O’bots for the Nationwide Chicago Machine.
Sep 10, 2008 - 4:58 am 12. RE:Those women attacking Gov. Palin are not feminists. They are marxists, totalitarians, and misandrists using grievance politics as a means to an end.
Sep 10, 2008 - 5:00 am 13. susan:“In her RNC speech, Sarah Palin voiced contempt for Democrats who wish to uphold the Constitution by “reading . . .rights” to Guantanamo detainees.”
TROLL ALERT
this is a propaganda stunt. Transcription of the complete sentence can be found anywhere. This person is trying to obfuscate.
Maybe you are someone who calls terrorists “freedom fighters” and think they should be treated with gloves. How democtatic!
And about community organizer. Don’t you grasp that we are not moking the profession, but merely something that’s a clear characteristic of Obama. He was not a community organizer, he was a FAILED community organizer (big difference), as many people in the chicago area can verify.
Sep 10, 2008 - 5:13 am 14. Kirk:Not all womens organizations care about women. Not all feminists care about females. The confusion I see is from being unable to see the elephant in the dining room. Some organizations (like NOW) and some feminists USE women to achieve their objectives. They are hiding behind their labels, so that they may attend to their real goals unhindered ; democrat ascendency, abortion and infanticide on demand, substituting leftist values for traditional values, and then the basic goals of money and power. You can see which feminists and organizations are the real ones and which are the phony facades when democrats do harm to women or a particular woman. Silence. Whether it’s a leftist foreign country that has horrific actions against women to Bill Clinton treating women like shake and bake bags, like usual in US media, the silences teach you more than the noise.
With Palin, the genuine hysteria in all leftist circles has led those that would usually be quiet to attack her. I swear the first two days I never heard an attack on her that did not involve her uterus in some way. Like democrat bigots throwing oreo cookies at black conservatives, these ‘feminists’ pile on in their own vulgar and obvious way. Paying close attention to who says what over the next two months will teach alot, if people are willing to observe and reflect.
Sep 10, 2008 - 5:28 am 15. Ed Wallis:As a veteran feminist of ‘71 vintage, I found this video of interest:
http://townhall.com/blog/g/8306bc92-692f-49e6-9a84-feee6f6a552e
Sep 10, 2008 - 5:54 am 16. MW:Not sure if my previous comment went through. In case it didn’t here it is again:
“furthermore I recently read on LGF that the GOP position on abortion, like the Catholic position, does not make exception for the life of the woman (correct me if I am wrong).”
You are min-numbingly wrong about both the GOP and the Catholic Church. Please make your lies slightly less transparant next time you post.
Sep 10, 2008 - 6:15 am 17. Gary Ogletree:Well said.
Sep 10, 2008 - 6:15 am 18. Robert:Obama picked Joe Biden for VP. I am no fan of Joe Biden. Looking at some of the things he said and did, he would not have been my choice. However, Obama choose him. I am assuming he did this as a counter to his own positions and ideals. It has been pionted out that Biden and Obama have disagreed on certain issues, and that is fine, the VP should provide some counter to Pres. Was Biden the best choice? I don’t think so, but he was at least as qualified as any of the others in the running.
McCain choose Sarah Palin. Now, Sarah Palin may be qualifed to act as president, should something happen to McCain. However, it is easily shown that many other republicnas, including at least half a dozen women, are much, much more qualified than she is to be VP, even Pres. So, we know McCain did not choose her because he believed she was the most qualifed. He choose her because of exactly what this letter eludes to. That she will get him more votes than any of the other candidates would have. No other candidate would have been able to fire up the base and get this much support from the female demographic, which does make her the best choice he could have made. Definetly not the most qualified choice, but as the McCain camp has already said, this will be an election about personality, not about politics and ability to do the job.
Sep 10, 2008 - 6:20 am 19. Robert:Alright Susan, here is the full sentence from Palin’s speech concerning terrorists and the reading of rights.
“Al-Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America… he’s worried that someone won’t read them their rights?”
Now, I do not call terrorists “freedom fighters”, would never dream of doing that. However, I will call terrorists something else, “civilians”.
They are not Soldiers, that much is clear. That only leaves civilians. You do not reate a separate catergory of combatant just to suit or own needs. There are Soldiers, and there are Civilians. They are civilians, and that means when they place a bomb and murder people, they are now “criminals”. And yes, every criminal on planet Earth should have “his rights read to him”, and at a minimum should be able to challenge their detention in a civilian court of law. This principle is basic for a democratic republic, and the belief that a person should be held indefinately without the right to challenge their imprisonment is an incredibly fascist belief.
Sep 10, 2008 - 6:30 am 20. TroopLover:‘Steinem wrote that “Palin opposes just about every issue that women support,” and goes on to list just what those issues are: Creationism (a belief in God and/or a belief that God created the world in seven days) and the right to learn about this right alongside classes about evolution; A disbelief in “global warming” (as if this is a “belief” right up there with a belief in God); “opposition to gun control” but support for “government control of women’s wombs.”
If this is true, WHY did support for McCain skyrocket after Palin’s speech (mostly women jumped on board) AND support is STILL climbing more than a week later.
As a Crisis Pregnancy counselor, let me tell you a little secret: MOST women have not bought into the feminists’ view that it is a woman’s choice to an abortion. There is WAY more at stake here. It’s called an innocent baby, duh. If a woman were carrying a banana or a lemon tree, abort away! But it is an innocent life that was formed as a result of sexual pleasure. Let’s leave the less than 1/2% of rape victims out of this-I’m speaking of the women (including me) who had consentual sex and got pregnant.
I am all for women CHOOSING what to do with their unwanted pregnancy, as long as that choice gives the baby the right to LIVE. Women have two GREAT choices- Keep the baby (as I did) and realize the greatest gift a woman will ever possess OR put the baby up for adoption. Thousands of men and women are on a waiting list for years to adopt a baby. Do you know what the number one reason is for a woman NOT wanting to put her baby up for adoption? “I couldn’t live with the fact that I will never see my baby again.” Huh????
Sep 10, 2008 - 6:39 am 21. Marcia Pappas:Hi Phyllis: thanks for posting my piece. The piece that I wrote was strictly to get women to think. To think about if any political party is representing us and our interests. Thinking women are dangerous and most politicians or political parties do not like women who think, much like the fundamentalists. They demand complete and unwaivering devotion. Drinking that cool-aide has never been my choice in life. As feminists, we should be looking to take over all levels of govenment and to put like minded people in places of power. I do want to go on the record by saying I would never vote for McCain/Palin. The reasons are obvious.
Sep 10, 2008 - 6:51 am 22. Lucille Zimmerman:Love this: “Indeed, I have found that religious people can also be profoundly pro-woman”
Several days ago I wrote an article on my blog about Jesus being the ultimate feminist! http://rumorsofglory.net/blog/?p=321
Sep 10, 2008 - 6:55 am 23. Self-hating boomer:Poor George. He can’t figure out why all the turds he threw at the wall aren’t sticking.
Sep 10, 2008 - 7:22 am 24. Ed Wallis:“Robert” 6:30 –
RE: soldiers vs. civilians and “universal rights” of “criminals”
You poor, confused person. Look up the political term “useful idiot.” It may help to clear up your confused notions about those wishing to annihilate us.
Sep 10, 2008 - 7:25 am 25. Valerie:“Sarah Palin has said nothing about the disgraceful arrests of journalists who covered demonstrations outside of the RNC.” — “Marion L”
And you’d better hope she doesn’t. I was listening to NPR the morning September 9, and got an earful about a group of people who obtained a grant “To demonstrate the Violence of the Police State” or somesuch drivel, and their adventures outside the RNC. They had to work at it, but they did manage to get some people arrested, including two of their “journalists.” We already know that there were Barack Obama fundraisers present in the convention hall for the purpose of disrupting the convention, and now we have NPR broadcasting that somebody has been doling out grant money for the same purpose outside that venue. You really don’t want somebody to start pulling on that thread.
Sep 10, 2008 - 7:31 am 26. david levavi:“…Ah, the abortion issue, always, only, the abortion issue. We fought hard for that right, and we have been forced to continue fighting for it…”
How sad that American feminism has been reduced to a one-issue movement.
I’m convinced that focused, concerted outreach by Western feminists to Muslim women around the world could do more to undermine reactionary Islamism and bring it into the modern world than force of arms. Alas, American feminists are forced remain in a defensive crouch to defend their basic rights to bodily freedom.
It is worth remembering that the current anti-abortion campaign is predicated on the quiet giving up the fight against contraception. Most right-to-lifers are using contraceptives which a generation ago were anathema. Morally inconsistent? You bet.
The notion that life begins at conception is entirely arbitrary. Anyone who has seen micrographic images of sperm cells swimming madly can’t but recognize them for living. Each little sperm cell carries within it the genetic coding of a full living being. Indeed the inherited characteristics of millions of human beings. Not life? Bull.
Not only is contraception quietly ignored but one reads that masturbation is recommended to clergy having difficulty maintaining their celibacy. Onan? Who’s he?
One might have thought tat after the recent scandals, the Paleos would have pulled their horns in, gotten out of other people’s bedrooms and tended to their own religious affairs. No such thing. Their only regret is that their more honorable co-religionists at the Boston Globe exposed their dirty secrets.
The older I get, the greater my respect for the Nineteenth Century Nativists. Turns out the Know-Nothings knew quite a lot.
Sep 10, 2008 - 7:55 am 27. Callahan23:Thanks for the reasoned articles.
Sep 10, 2008 - 8:23 am 28. Tony:One thing though struck me as odd.
Dr. Chesler why did you describe “female genital mutilation” FMG as the much more toned-down version “female genital cutting”?
You are a courageous woman, not afraid to speak your mind, so please don’t use such ‘appeasing’ language.
Not being from the USA myself (and therefore not affiliated with either party) I have to say that I find it very sad that a mother of 5 children, with an extremely successful political career, is being treated so pathetically by members her own gender just because she doesn’t buy into the feminist agenda.
Its such a shame that some feminists do not have the capacity to step back a little from their narrow views to see just how morally bankrupt they have become. Strong women like Sarah Palin are going to make these dinosaurs irrelevant and that can only be a good thing.
Sep 10, 2008 - 8:26 am 29. Tina Trent:It has been a very long time since the N.O.W. even remotely spoke for the vast majority of women in this country who self-identify as feminists or live by the principles of demanding equality and respect that N.O.W. purports to represent. The sad truth is that N.O.W. long ago subsumed any real commitment to women or equality by submitting themselves to a fairly humiliating, inferior position on the totem pole of political correctness — the agenda of racial minorities, gays and transgendered people is and has been the priority of the organization for a long time. And, good for those people, but the N.O.W. is supposed to speak for women, and all women. One example that relates to crime? The N.O.W. leadership quietly acquiesced to the hidden policy of not counting any rapes (or any other crime) as “gender bias” hate crimes committed against women — while telling their membership otherwise. Publicly, they claim they’re advocating for “counting” women by supporting the “gender bias” category — privately, they acknowledge, accept and put their crucial approval on the practice of reserving the “gender” category only for non-biologically born women or men, that is, transvestites/transgendered people. Observe how the N.O.W. is front and center speaking out on so-called hate crimes involving sexual orientation, sexual identity or race, but oddly quiet when cases emerge that demand a consideration of gender-bias hatred. Then, they might hold a rally, if that, but they (carefully) never hold public officials responsible for enforcing the “gender” category in ways that actually apply to women. This is a symptom of a much larger betrayal of their membership and just one reason why the N.O.W. operates largely, today, as a subordinate semi-partner at the table of liberalism or straw-woman for anti-feminists seeking to illustrate the excesses of the movement. So when the N.O.W. (not here, but elsewhere) criticizes Palin for not prioritizing women, I say clean up your own house first, as it were, particularly when it comes to crime, where the N.O.W.’s sole contributions of late have been whitewashing that despicable hate crimes boondoggle and not speaking out on Islamofascist oppression of women.
I do second the desire to know more about Palin’s commitment to policies fighting crime. I’m afraid that Republicans often speak a good game on being tough on crime but don’t follow through with the resources necessary to do the policing and sustain prosecutions. And on this, we owe Joe Biden a great deal. Unfortunately, he’s of the Party that is more enamored of cop-killers than law enforcement. We need to get back to Clinton-era community policing supports (and kill the ridiculous bias crime industry, which is a jobs program for ideologues and injects identity politics into the valuation of different crime victims — bad for women and children and justice in general). Will the new feminism Palin embodies offer new opportunities for second-wave feminists to finally realize the anti-violence agenda that was never welcomed in the anti-law enforcement Left? I don’t know yet.
Sep 10, 2008 - 8:27 am 30. Pam:Robert wrote:
“They are not Soldiers, that much is clear. That only leaves civilians. You do not reate a separate catergory of combatant just to suit or own needs. There are Soldiers, and there are Civilians. They are civilians, and that means when they place a bomb and murder people, they are now “criminals”. And yes, every criminal on planet Earth should have “his rights read to him”, and at a minimum should be able to challenge their detention in a civilian court of law. This principle is basic for a democratic republic, and the belief that a person should be held indefinately without the right to challenge their imprisonment is an incredibly fascist belief.”
There is another class: Illegal combatants, better known as guerrillas. This has been accepted for several centuries, at least. At the end of the American Civil War when Lee surrendered to Grant, one of the things to be determined was who was a legal combatant and who was not. Grant was very much surprised to learn that John Singleton Mosby was a legal combatant and not a guerrilla. Had Mosby and his men been guerrillas, they could simply have been shot on sight with no chance to surrender. Most of the generals on both sides were graduates of West Point and were using standard, for the day, military tactics and strategy. Mosby, on the other hand, was a lawyer and used tactics and strategy more suited to a courtroom than a battlefield.
Two of the heroes of the American Revolution were guerrillas: Thomas Sumter and Francis Marion, who was called the Swamp Fox. Ft. Sumter, SC, is named for Thomas Sumter. The fate of guerrillas depends almost entirely on whether or not they are on the winning side.
Had the British captured either Sumter or Marion, they would have just shot them on sight or perhaps hanged them. They would not have been taken prisoner and released at the end of hostilities.
Various and assorted terrorists, whether acting alone or in concert with others, are guerrillas (illegal combatants). Neither the rules that apply to soldiers nor the rules that apply to civilians apply to them.
The illegal combatants at Gitmo are being treated much, much better than they would have been treated in the past.
Like Sarah Palin, I have little concern with whether or not these illegal combatants, who wish to murder us in gross lots, are read their rights.
Sep 10, 2008 - 8:35 am 31. Ed Wallis:Pam 8:35am – I agree fully with your comments. “Robert” would likely be CARING for his “civilians” up to the point they behead him live online….
Sep 10, 2008 - 9:03 am 32. Feminists for Sarah Palin! « Rosettasister’s Weblog:[...] “Is Palin a Law and Order Candidate? This Veteran Feminist Sure Hopes So.” [...]
Sep 10, 2008 - 9:05 am 33. TroopLover:david levaviwrote:
“Not only is contraception quietly ignored but one reads that masturbation is recommended to clergy having difficulty maintaining their celibacy. Onan? Who’s he?”
You may be better off not to refer to the Bible, if you don’t understand it…which is evident in your case: Onan was murdered for the “crime” of using a primitive method of birth control to avoid conceiving a child, NOT for masturbating.
Sep 10, 2008 - 9:09 am 34. cedarford:It might help to read the entire chapter…<
Marion L – In her RNC speech, Sarah Palin voiced contempt for Democrats who wish to uphold the Constitution by “reading . . .rights” to Guantanamo detainees. Thus, it appears that she implicitly endorses the Eighth Amendment violations that prevail at Guantanamo every day.
You say that enemy illegal combatants should have more rights than other POWs we held? We had 100s of thousands of Nazi POWs and not one was given a lawyer until war crimes trials started after the war for the minority of Axis POWs that HAD committed war crimes.
Worse, Left-liberal Democrats go beyond that to say that unlawful enemy combatants can only have their “rights” protected in CIVILIAN COURT…that the military system is a travesty. —Except that is the same military system they were always content with trying American soldiers, volunteer or draftee…..so why the claim that Islamic killers should have more legal rights and civilian due process over an American serving in uniform?
We could see if we are as compassionate as the enemy about all the 8th Amendment stuff since Lefties imagine GITMO as a giant torture camp – except for one little problem.
The Islamoids have no POWs. They kill any wounded or helpless American they can without mercy…saving only a few for later to do beheading videos.
Pam provides a very accurate historical context. Outside Euroweenies and the US Left, there is little present or past compassion for illegal enemy combatants that hold to no rules for Quarter or limits on their butchery.
Sep 10, 2008 - 9:12 am 35. Krazy Joe:RE: domestic violence. As a man who has worked in a DV intervention program, the “troopergate” story really struck a nerve. Were Palin a democrat, she would have been hailed as saviour of women for doing everything she could, within the law, to get that bum off the force.
The fact that he remains a cop shows how the democratic union minions really feel about women and violence against them.
Where was Joe Biden’s outrage, as a sponsor of VAWA, at both the trooper, and the union that has insured he will remain a cop until he chooses not to.
Sep 10, 2008 - 9:37 am 36. Bloodthirsty Liberal » Phyllistines for Palin:[...] yes, and Phyllis Chesler: I admit it, call me crazy, but I was utterly charmed by Governor Sarah Palin which is to say that, [...]
Sep 10, 2008 - 9:51 am 37. Marion L:Dear susan:
As I have never met you and have never had a conversation with you in person, it is very uncivil and intemperate of you to imply that I am “someone who calls terrorists ‘freedom fighters’ and think they should be treated with gloves.” On 9/11/2001, my husband worked only a few blocks away from the World Trade Center and I am quite aware of how horrible terrorism is. If you think that your irrational accusations will deter me from posting responses to Dr. Chesler’s articles, please think again. As I love the First Amendment, they will not.
Moreover, I do not think that your quarrel is really with me. It is with the Eighth Amendment to the Constituion of the United States, which reads as follows:
“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
In my opinion, Bush and Cheney have violated the Eighth Amendment and McCain and Palin are likely to violate it. In my opinion, Barack Obama’s experience as a professor of constitutional law makes him better qualified to enforce the Eighth Amendment than McCain or Palin.
If you disagree, then you should put forth a rational argument rather than attempting to slander someone whom you have never met.
Sep 10, 2008 - 10:17 am 38. schnargley:Though I may have male sexual paraphernalia, inside, I feel like I am a woman, and so as a woman, I am in complete, explosive outrage over this piece by Chesler. How could any woman in their right minds even remotely suggest that anyone who does not completely reflect the views of Marx, Sanger, Cindy Sheehan, and Rosie O’Donnell could possibly be thought of as pro-woman, or even a woman? That is a no-brainer! Hunting, fishing, raising five kids, mayor, governor,…ETC., ETC. Crappola! This shameless tool of identity politics is shamelessly exploiting her supposed strength, achievements, and motherhood to oppress and discourage women from equality.
Palin is not a true woman, and neither are you, Chesler. And Condi Rice is neither a real woman, nor a real black. You are both nothing more than women on the outside, and men on the inside.
Sep 10, 2008 - 10:22 am 39. Chuck Pelto:TO: MW
RE: Attribution, Please
It would be great and it would save me time, if you and others here would begin providing WHO the heck said something to which you are responding.
I’m referring to your engagement with that character who goes by the nom des blogs of ‘iammefrommiami’ and their mis-information about how the GOP and the Roman Catholic Church looks upon abortion to save a woman’s life.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Sep 10, 2008 - 11:06 am 40. Chuck Pelto:[Every violation of truth is not only a sort of suicide in the liar, but is a stab at the health of human society. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson]
TO: Phyllis Chesler, et al.
RE: Hillary as Running Mate?
I’ll take that bet.
Why?
Because anyone with more than two synapses to rub together and an eye for history would recognize Lady MacBeth when she walks up and smiles.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Sep 10, 2008 - 11:10 am 41. William of Orange:[Out, damned spot. -- Hillary talking to the carpet in what was, a few moments before, Vince Foster's office]
schnargley:
“Though I may have male sexual paraphernalia, inside, I feel like I am a woman, and so as a woman, I am in complete, explosive outrage over this piece by Chesler.
..those are your pre-op chemical hormones kicking in. Take a couple of Midol and lie down; you’ll feel better bye-n-bye.
Sep 10, 2008 - 11:16 am 42. Self-hating boomer:NOW and the feminist left lost all credibility when they decided that propping Bill Clinton up was more important than standing up for his female victims. But they actually exposed themselves as political prostitutes a long time before that – when they decided that Teddy Kennedy’s use and subsequent disposal of a woman was no big deal because he voted the agenda.
Expediency has always come back to bite the gender feminists. In the long run, they’d have been better served by integrity, but they don’t know the meaning of the word.
Sep 10, 2008 - 11:18 am 43. Deborah:“Funny, but her position on women’s issues is not all that clear.”
Her position on most issues is not all that clear. (”Alaska is near Russia” and “she commands the Alaskan National Guard” aside.) This is because rather than immediately being all over the Sunday shows and every possible interview to introduce her position on national (as opposed to Alaskan) issues, she can’t meet the press until they demonstrate they can be sufficiently deferential.
Had Obama tapped Sebelius, and then hidden her away from all but the most carefully teleprompted speech, the Republicans would be rolling on the floor with hysterical laughter at the poor fragile flower and how little the campaign that tapped her thought of her.
As it happens I assume Palin must be reasonably competent–she was elected governor, after all. But the fragile flower stuff certainly sends a message that she can’t be trusted not to embarrass the campaign. They have more faith in Meghan McCain; she still gives interviews.
Sep 10, 2008 - 11:22 am 44. Anu:Anu:
to schargley,
Palin, Chesler and ms Rice are of course all women. They just have different mindsets.Dr.Chesler is doing all she knows how to get McCain elected.If it’s via Palin, fine.
What I would like to know is Palins’ environmental record. Is it true that she had the Alaskan wild life killed
Sep 10, 2008 - 12:02 pm 45. Lucille Zimmerman:out of the way of the pipeline,which is not even proved by the Senate yet? Is she ALL about oil?
Love this: “Indeed, I have found that religious people can also be profoundly pro-woman.”
A few days ago I put a post on my blog about Jesus being the ultimate feminist!
What I like more than Sarah’s views on things is that she puts her money where her mouth is. If she says she is pro-life, she gives birth to a Down’s baby when 90% are aborted. If she says she’s going to cut excess spending she does so, even if it affects her. So even if I were to disagree with her on something, I would respect her point of view. She is a breath of fresh air a world full of politicians who play games
Sep 10, 2008 - 12:14 pm 46. goy:Marcia, you wrote: So I got to thinking, what if we exchanged “men” for “the party?”
The validity of Norwood’s self-assessment is demonstrated by the fact that it can be inverted and used by men to examine unhealthy relationships with women perfectly well.
But your attempt to turn this potentially life-saving tool into some sort of psychobabelicious indictment of the (conservative) identity politics you think you see, based on your delusional fantasy of a “patriarchal, misogynistic society”, is emblematic of the sort of nonsense at the core of so-called “feminism” – at least among its self-anointed leadership.
If you were to be intellectually honest – that is, if you were truly interested in getting women to think about whether or not any political party is representing us and our interests – you would exchange “men” for “my government”, since this would be an infinitely more instructive exercise in the context of this particular election. After all, the outcome you’re ultimately searching for with your revised-test-cum-diatribe is a government that is responsive to the Will of the People. Isn’t it?
Shouldn’t we be looking to explain why women – and men – have such difficulty holding their government accountable for its actions? Perhaps we might start there, instead of playing sophomoric, tribal “Us Against Them” political party games that imply superiority of one ideology over another.
In the process you might begin to understand Gov. Palin’s unprecedented popularity.
Sep 10, 2008 - 12:23 pm 47. Yaacov Ben Moshe:Phyllis,
My latest post sheds some light on Palin Derangement – I think you will find it interesting…
The rubric comes right out of the liberal lexicon but it really works- It explains why Palin enrages them so much.
It turns out that, if you look at it from their perspective, the Democrats (and the liberal media too) are all either a bunch of women who are pretending to be men or men who are pretending to be women that pretend to be men. It’s a mess but it explains a lot!
http://breathofthebeast.blogspot.com/2008/09/rage-sex-roles-elections-and-media.html
Sep 10, 2008 - 12:28 pm 48. iammefrommiami:ed wallis-I don’t support Obama
Sep 10, 2008 - 1:26 pm 49. Ed Wallis:Marion L. 10:17 – “In my opinion, Bush and Cheney have violated the Eighth Amendment and McCain and Palin are likely to violate it. In my opinion, Barack Obama’s experience as a professor of constitutional law makes him better qualified to enforce the Eighth Amendment than McCain or Palin.”
YADA YADA. More from the trolls. Are you also a “Democratic” Socialist, like the other troll, who has yet to respond to ‘why a Jewish feminist’ supports a candidate so praised by Farrakhan, Hamas and other terrorist groups out for our destruction and that of Israel?!
To mirror your words, I could just as well say that Zerobama wants to (and as “a professor of constitutional law” can) warp the Constitution so much – whether through DoJ or SCOTUS – that the United States would more resemble Russia. He is the worst possible choice for the United States.
And please, SPARE ME YOUR “feelings” writing; it reminds me of the cynical, hypocritical words of those Leftists who, upon learning of Palin’s VP selection, suddenly developed a bent for morals, family values, responsibility, etc etc. I and the others here SEE WHERE YOU’RE GOING WITH THIS, SISTER.
WE CARE TOO. Just not for Socialism for The United States of America.
Sep 10, 2008 - 1:26 pm 50. iammefrommiami:re:ED WALLIS-
my reply may not have posted so I’ll post again. Answer -I do not support Obama (
-re: other question I didn’t say that either-I said the republican position on abortion is against Halacha (which I guess is a way of saying it’s against Israel)but so what, we don’t vote for candidates based on what they think of ISrael do we I mean whatever they think is best for AMerica.
I wouldn’t expect Americans to put their necks out for ISrael.
peace out
Sep 10, 2008 - 1:32 pm 51. jay:Chuck Pelto: You sir are an a***. Usually I dont like to use such words in debate but you earned it. You insult me and leave. You’re an A***.
THIS HAS BEEN EDITED BY THE NETIQUETTE POLICE. THANK YOU FOR UNDERSTANDING
Sep 10, 2008 - 1:32 pm 52. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: immamfrommiami
I was expecting something like this from them, sooner or later.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Sep 10, 2008 - 1:42 pm 53. Chuck Pelto:[Anywhere....Anytime....for a friend.....]
TO: Jay
RE: Is THAT….
….the BEST you can do?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Sep 10, 2008 - 1:44 pm 54. jay:P.S. I’ve been abused by the BEST. And you don’t measure up to the likes of Colonel ‘No Slack’ Stack.
THIS HAS BEEN EDITED BY THE NETIQUETTE POLICE. THANK YOU FOR UNDERSTANDING
Wow! They really do exist.
Sep 10, 2008 - 1:44 pm 55. Chuck Pelto:P.S…..
….Out of curiosity….
….just WHAT comment are you referring to here? I see you name only in the sub-normal allegations about anatomical parts.
So. Wherefrom do you bring this piece before us here?
Sep 10, 2008 - 1:46 pm 56. Tina Trent:S.H. Boom: you paint with a broad stroke there, unless “gender feminist” means something I don’t understand. It is also equally on everybody — not only feminists — to oppose oppressions, sins and evils, be they Islamofascist misogyny or Teddy Kennedy’s disturbing history. The FMF has always led on these issues, almost exclusively in the U.S., and they deserve credit they don’t receive for that.
The N.O.W. has always been as much a media invention as a movement, as is the case with virtually every charismatic social change group. They take up too much air and time, frankly, for their record in recent years, and their negative record is appalling. But if you look at the legislative changes that have permitted equity — and just that — the broader modern feminist movement has been startlingly successful in a short period of time. Not many years ago, it wasn’t possible — or done — to incarcerate most child molesters, to keep with the L&O theme here, and feminists changed that. And Hillary Clinton played a direct and substantial role in child protection from the time she left law school. I won’t defend Bill, but I give credit where credit is due, and she is one of many due credit for practicing a very family- and child-friendly feminism. Abortion? She was moving the ball in fascinating ways that would have done much, much more than the election status quo now. Too bad hysteria from both sides of the fence, but most especially the Left, kept her from moving forward. I think she would have continued to surprise her critics, just as she impressed many conservative colleagues in the Senate.
Sep 10, 2008 - 1:51 pm 57. jay:Hey m, that was from another thread. You know I thought you where ok now I know the truth.
Sep 10, 2008 - 1:57 pm 58. jay:“This is getting boring. I’m moving on. See ya’ll later. Remember to VOTE. Peace out — jay”
Sep 10, 2008 - 2:01 pm 59. Terry Gain:I was refering to the people in the thread using terms like – what am I doing? You don’t deserve an explanation anymore. You know NOTHING about me. I served my country a##hole. I didn’t deserve that crap from you.
“I admit it, call me crazy, but I was utterly charmed by Governor Sarah Palin”
So have we reached the point where some need to apologize for normal feelings? Sarah Palin is charming and wonderful in so many many ways.
So what if she doesn’t pass the feminist litmus test? They need a new test.
Feminists claim to want equality, while ignoring the fact that a man’s right to control his reproduction ends at intercourse. And men no longer walk away from the consequences of sexual behavior which results in the creation of life.
While it is true that the burden of an unwanted pregnancy falls more heavily on the female nature (and science) has endowed her, in comparison with the male, with the tools to protect herself.
For instance, very few males need to be wined and dined and danced until their feet are sore merely to awaken their libidos. A woman can have sex whenever she wants. The supply of willing partners is endless.
Sep 10, 2008 - 3:08 pm 60. chris:As a woman, I am much more offended by Sarah Palin comparing any one of my gender to a pit bull than I would be if Obama had actually called a woman a lipsticked pig. Pigs are intelligent, useful creatures and pit bulls are an abomination created by men for their own sick purposes and pleasures. Do you all really want to go there? It’s just incredibly amusing to hear all of you conservatives crying out for the rights of women all of a sudden. Like you all, I reserve my right to vote for the candidate who best reflects my politics and won’t be swayed from abandoning my principles because a candidate has some of the same body parts I do.
Sep 10, 2008 - 3:32 pm 61. Heather:“it is easily shown that many other republicnas, including at least half a dozen women, are much, much more qualified than she is to be VP”
I’m still waiting for someone–anyone–who says this to name those more-qualified Republican women.
Sep 10, 2008 - 3:36 pm 62. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: jay & Context
How about people like jay learn how to compartmentalize their ‘issues’. This is the second time in just about as many days someone who can’t quite keep their temper under control has gone ballistic in a thread where it is non sequitur.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. jay….
….I’ll be happy to oblige you in a discussion of this matter on the original topical thread.
Sep 10, 2008 - 3:40 pm 63. Yaakov Watkins:As a man, I would not dream of injecting myself into the fracas between women who view themselves as “pit bulls with lipstick” and the Gloria Steinem crowd. It is an incredible clash of self images.
However, it is great entertainment. Female mud wrestling for the political crowd.
Sep 10, 2008 - 5:46 pm 64. Alan:Heather:
What about Christie Todd Whitman from NJ or Kay Bailey Hutchinson from TX, for starters?
Sep 10, 2008 - 6:41 pm 65. Kevin:This is to Robert who posted on 06.10.08 6:30pm
“They are not Soldiers, that much is clear. That only leaves civilians. You do not reate a separate catergory of combatant just to suit or own needs. There are Soldiers, and there are Civilians. They are civilians, and that means when they place a bomb and murder people, they are now “criminals””
They are not “criminals”, they are unlawful combatants according to the Geneva Conventions and can be shot on site. The Taliban declared war on us and we finally responded. I believe those scum are getting better treatment than they deserve, but I understand that we need to intel from them and possibly release the few that deserve it. After that, to HELL with them. They murdered innocent people and can go to hades in a pigskinned coffin as far as am concerned.
Sep 10, 2008 - 7:04 pm 66. Alan:Along with opposing programs designed to prevent teen pregnancy, Palin cut funding for an organization called Passage House, whose purpose is to provide “young mothers a place to live with their babies for up to eighteen months while they gain the necessary skills and resources to change their lives” and help teen moms “become productive, successful, independent adults who create and provide a stable environment for themselves and their families.”
So on one hand, Palin would demand teenage girls not have abortions, but then deny them the services needed to provide a stable environment for their babies. Does she not realize that not everyone has the resources she is lucky enough to have? Or does she just not care?
And why on earth would self-described feminists like Chesler and Pappas consider voting for someone like that? Because the Democrats didn’t nominate Hillary? I guess the pundits are right – this election is about personality and possibly gender, not issues. Would they consider voting for a man that held those same views?
Sep 10, 2008 - 7:05 pm 67. heather:what I am TRULY interested in is a movement to support the victims of Islamic violence. So, how does one go about actually making such a thing happen?
One thing, support of women escaping from violence.
Another: making sure police: local and regional, understand the necessity to (a) protect women; and (2) look at family violence within Islamic homes as one that involves the entire family…
and etc.
Sep 10, 2008 - 10:08 pm 68. Marion L.:Dear Mr. Wallis:
I know that you are trying your very best to descend to susan’s level but you are not quite there yet. You may wish to study the career of the late Senator Joseph McCarthy for additional mudslinging techniques. Like susan [of Sep 10 2008 - 5:13 am], you are very uncivil. Like susan, you appear to have forgotten that Dr. Chesler values civility. And Mr. Wallis, it really is very petulant and childish to call Barack Obama “Zerobama.” Were you channeling your Inner Child on Sep 10, 2008 – 1:26 pm?
Dear cedarford:
As an American patriot, I think that our military justice system should be run by people who follow the law as set forth in the U.S. Constitution. That includes the Eighth Amendment. Reversing the Bush/Cheney violations at Guantanamo would favorably distinguish the U.S. from Middle Eastern dictatorships. My father, and millions of other courageous Americans, risked their lives during World War II to defend the “Eighth Amendment stuff” that you
ridicule. In large part, I oppose Bush/Cheney to honor my father’s memory. My father would be appalled by your cavalier reference to “Eighth Amendment stuff”. It would be inconceivable for him to think that it is OK to mistreat prisoners because our enemies mistreat prisoners. That is what you are arguing and it is, quite frankly, a very un-American argument.
Dear Valerie:
Whatever you may think of the protesters at the RNC, it was still illegal for the police to arrest the journalists who covered them. The Committee to Protect Journalists, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Amnesty International have all criticized these arrests as blatant violations of the First Amendment. Moreover, the First Amendment applies both to journalists with whom you agree and to journalists with whom you disagree. Ironically, it even applies to you.
Dear heather:
McCain and Palin will do little or nothing to help women “victims of violence,” whether Islamic or not. It is Biden who wrote the Violence Against Women Act; which was supported primarily by Democratic legislators. Republicans complained about its cost. Morevor, it is sheer cruelty for Palin to argue that even victims of rape and incest should not be allowed to have safe, legal abortions. As McCain voted with Bush over 90% of the time, he cannot be counted on to reduce our dependence on foreign oil; which includes dependence on oil from the gender apartheid nation of Saudi Arabia. Finally, do not forget that McCain remained silent when one of his supporters referred to Hillary Clinton as “the bitch.”
With his expertise in constitutional law and experience as a community organizer, Barack Obama is the best choice for those of us who support women’s human rights.
Sep 11, 2008 - 12:35 am 69. Ed Wallis:“Alan” 7:05 –
Your SMEAR post claiming that Palin “opposing programs designed to prevent teen pregnancy” is A LIE and has been demonstrated on a number of site to be so.
Please know that further such incompetent and desperate attempts to spread falsehoods only reveals to all Americans the true nature of Obama and his Nationwide Chicago Machine.”
Keep it up, if you wish…but do so to the detriment of your candidate!
*** McCAIN / PALIN ‘08 !!! ***
Sep 11, 2008 - 4:52 am 70. goy:Alan, the name of the organization you’re lying about is Covenant House. You’ve been duped by yet another WaPo lie.
“Covenant House Alaska is a multi-service agency serving homeless and runaway youth, including teen mothers. The majority of the agency’s annual operating budget is privately raised, with no more than 10 to 15 percent of funds coming from state grants in any given year. We are grateful for the support we have received from Governor Sarah Palin, the Alaska legislature and our Congressional
delegation over the years.
Despite some press reports to the contrary, our operating budget was not reduced. Our $3.9 million appropriation is directed toward a multi-year capital project and it is our understanding that the state simply opted to phase in its support for this project over several years, rather than all at once in the current budget year.”
Covenant House Alaska is Alaska’s largest private non-profi t adolescent care agency serving homeless, runaway and at –risk youth between the ages of 13 and 21. With particular expertise in helping some of the most hopeless teens grow into independent, successful and productive adults.”
- Deirdre A. Cronin, Executive Director, Covenant House
And Marcia Pappas made it abundantly clear above that she would NOT be voting for McCain/Palin. Reading comprehension much?
Sep 11, 2008 - 5:19 am 71. abbyzmom:All I have to say is BRAVO! to Sarah Palin and her family. The reason the feminist hate her so much, is that she stands for the “real” truth. The feminist have been throwing women a line for 30 years, and many have been caught up in it. The young women of the past 25 and 30 years have seen nothing to distinguish themselves from being nothing more than a sex object. The feminist have been snagged by their own lie that women should have all these “choices”? The only thing they have portrayed to young women over the years is you can have sex just like a man; don’t worry about getting pregnant, cause you just get rid of it;..basically that’s it. They really haven’t stood for women’s rights at all.
Sep 11, 2008 - 7:34 am 72. Tina Trent:There have been no standard set for women, only degredation by the hand of the feminist movement. The truth hurts, and they are scared outta their boots that a real woman, with real values may stand up and speak her “real” mind without their influence.
Now women and young girls will have someone to look up to, admire, and say hey, being a real woman isn’t bad after all.
Heather — if you want to see something happen, make an appointment with your legislator. Go see them and express your concern. That’s where it starts.
Abbyzmom — I would say the same to you, but you seem less interested in doing and more in pontificating. You are hysterically mistaking media feminists for the varied women and men who support equality and live by that standard. There is much foolishness that parades as feminism — and then there is the legislative record. Learn the difference, and remember, given the choice between writing about a dull action to enhance prosecutorial efforts to carry domestic violence cases through the system and a bunch of dumb women acting out about their vaginas, the media’s going to pick the latter. The sexual revolution is not feminism. Go blame the sick hipsters and hippies and radicals who started that.
Marion L. — The Democratic Party has stood against enforcement of sex crime laws for fifty years and has worked at every turn to enhance criminals’ rights and defund and diminish prosecutors. VAWA was good legislation that was unfortunately often waylaid into intentionally useless activist coffers rather than being used to actually enhance convictions — because the idea of putting even the sickest criminal away is counter to the Democrats’ incessant fetishization of predators. You are right about the culpability of Republicans in the Middle East.
Sep 11, 2008 - 9:01 am 73. SGT Ted:I will call terrorists something else, “civilians”.
Equating Terrorists, who are war criminals according to the GC, to any other Joe sixpack “civilian” is grossly offensive. And wrong, so very very wrong. You would have made more sense calling them “freedom fighters”. You would have still been wrong, but you wouldn’t look uninformed and silly doing it.
Sep 11, 2008 - 9:06 am 74. SGT Ted:I also wonder why violence against women needs a special law, when the vast majority of the murdered are men. The VAWA is a piece of sexist trash aimed at men and only men.
Also, the idea that Military Courts don’t follow the Constitution is misleading and ignorance cubed. Congress makes the laws that govern Military Courts and Tribunals. The only different thing is that military tribunals and juries don’t put up with showboating and BS lawyer tricks that civilians courts deal with. The Military won’t empanel a “California Jury” that will ignore clear evidence and aquit the guilty using a political excuse “cops are racist” or sympathy for someone who’s an orphan because he killed his own parents.
Sep 11, 2008 - 9:27 am 75. goy:- The Military won’t empanel a “California Jury” that will ignore clear evidence and aquit the guilty using a political excuse “cops are racist” or sympathy for someone who’s an orphan because he killed his own parents.
…or insanity like this, which simply has to be seen to be believed.
“The threat of global warming is so great that campaigners were justified in causing more than £35,000 worth of damage to a coal-fired power station, a jury decided yesterday.
Sep 11, 2008 - 10:56 am 76. Anna:Thank you for this incredibly thoughtful article. What a breath of fresh air to read something with integrity, intelligence, honesty, and not all whipped up with bias or hype. This is the most thoughtful piece I’ve read on Palin’s candidacy in addition to a recent work by Lynette Long, who makes a very different kind of argument, but one that is equally as thoughtful and so very worthy of consideration.
Sep 11, 2008 - 12:15 pm 77. JimB:Hillary Clinton will be put on the Democrat ticket tomorrow afternoon at 5PM EDT. Joe Biden will step aside “for the good of the cause” and will receive a cabinet post if this ploy actually works. In addition, Obama will be promising to absorb all the Clinton campaign debts in exchange for her presence on the ticket. Then, they believe, that Hill’s voters will come back to them. What they fail to calculate is that Sarah does not appeal to many of Hill’s voters. And all of this is being negotiated with Bill and Hill as I write. And all you guys are studying abortion rights and feminism and all that other peripheral stuff. This is all just my opinion, of course.
Sep 11, 2008 - 12:40 pm 78. avoidswork:Palin has nothing on feminism.
Putting aside her views on women’s “choice” – recall this includes cases of incest or rape – and her strong belief in abstinence only education…
What about the fact that Wasilla, AK was the city charging rape victims for payment of their rape kits? In a state with the largest number of rape cases, incest AND violence against women (deaths), how does this approach feminism?
The gist of the article referenced below
(From Anchorage Daily News(adn), By ALEX deMARBAN, April 25, 2007)
Key findings of rape study
• 1 in 3 Native and American Indian women raped in their lifetimes
• 2.5 times higher rape rate for Native women than other U.S. women
• 9.7 times more Native women sexually assaulted than other women in Anchorage from 2000 to 2003
Finally, how does Palin respond to the recent misleading “sex ed” McCain ad? Is she FOR children NOT being taught appropriate vs. inappropriate touching and who they can report it to? Is she FOR the sexual predators?
I mean, considering violence in her state…
Sep 11, 2008 - 12:59 pm 79. Ed Wallis:“avoidswork,”
THANKS for “sharing,” but we here all know where to go if we want to see a list of Daily Smears about Palin; they’re followed usually about a day or so later by their absolute refutation.
Keep adding tin foil to your cap, “avoidswork,” they’re coming for you!
Sep 11, 2008 - 11:52 pm 80. Ed Wallis:Some more nice thoughts on the “Women versus Palin” matter:
http://townhall.com/columnists/JonahGoldberg/2008/09/12/feminist_army_aims_its_cannons_at_palin
Sep 12, 2008 - 1:39 am 81. avoidswork:ED:
Funny as
(1) no refutation or citation regarding a refutation;
(2) Wasilla has already been shown not to be the sole city in AK charging for rape kits (there was another one) but yet, the state legislature of AK had to write a law to prevent cities from charging the alleged victim for the kit;
(3) typical response of “you go ahead and smear, liberal!” without addressing said issue;
(4) Goldberg article does not refer to rape kit story AND written by a man; and
(5) no addressing “feminism”, no adressing “choice” as in “Bristol made a choice, but once I’m in office you can’t” philosophy.
But at least she knows that Russia is near Alaska…
Sep 12, 2008 - 10:10 am 82. Ed Wallis:Since “avoidswork” is indeed as lazy as his “TAG”, try this, you smearspreader:
http://explorations.chasrmartin.com/2008/09/06/palin-rumors/
Sep 12, 2008 - 2:27 pm 83. avoidswork:Ed:
Avoidswork has a uterus.
Here you go; linked from the comments of your above “explorations” link:
http://thenextright.com/mikewas/the-latest-palin-smear-making-rape-victims-pay
Therefor, until 2000 Wasilla AK charged women who went to the hospital and had a rape kit performed for said kits.
The policy was not INTRODUCED by Palin, but this travesty occurred on her watch.
And agan, I am writing in the feminist thread. This policy, under her watch, does not incite feminism. Especially in a state (AK) with horrid rape/incest/violence against women statistics such as Alaska.
Sep 12, 2008 - 3:13 pm 84. Ed Wallis:MS. LAZY 3:13pm –
Point 255 in my link.
The link from there states (by “MikeWas”) – for all to read:
“What is it this time? Supposedly, then-Mayor Palin is to blame for charging rape vicitms for their medical exams.
The smear relies on a story in The Frontiersman, a Walssila newspaper, about passage of an Alaskan law that banned police departments from chargin insurance companies for the cost of a medical exam after a reported sexual battery.
The story quoted Wassila Police Chief Fannon as opposing the bill: “In the past we’ve charged the cost of exams to the victims insurance company when possible. I just don’t want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer.”
So, you ask – where’s the smear? Palin haters have twisted the story, claiming that Palin – by virtue of being Fannon’s boss as mayor of Wassilla – wanted to charge the victims themselves (not the insurance companies) for the cost of the exam. But unless you’re intentionally misreading the story, you cannot possibly make that claim.
Chief Fannon’s quote, and the article itself, were very clear: it was only the insurance companies that got the bill. Not a single rape victim has ever been asked by the Wassilla police to pay a penny for a rape kit. How can we tell? Not one has come forward – despite Palin’s rise to prominence. This “story” only broke because one sufferer of Palin Derangement Syndrome, who happens to have a blog, also happens to have run across – and deliberately twisted – the Frontiersman story.
If even a single rape victim had been charged for a forensic exam, don’t you think it would have come out during the governor’s race – when Palin beat the guy who signed the bill? Don’t you think it would have come out before the convention?
Of course it would have.
But that doesn’t matter to the people who are willing to believe anything about Sarah Palin, so long as it’s nasty.“
Sep 12, 2008 - 3:53 pm 85. avoidswork:You didn’t read the comment section, did you?
Sep 12, 2008 - 4:27 pm 86. tanstaafl:Sarah Palin is real, although you might find your favorite pundit (e.g. Charlie Gibson) staring at her over glasses low down on his nose, playing tough and looking stern.
Pelosi, Hillary, Steinem, Sally Quinn…words and more words, and (hope they don’t notice) nearly vapid beyond recognition.
Go for it America, you’ve got less than 2 months to choose between vapid and real.
Sep 12, 2008 - 7:29 pm 87. the-gunslinger:The so-called “feminists” are nothing more than Radical Left-Wing Activists using women to advance that agenda.
And I resent the hell out of them co-opting the name “feminist”.
I am a Conservative “feminist”, because I believe that small government, lower taxes, individual liberty, personal responsibility, the sanctity of marriage, and equality of opportunity will create the best climate for people…including WOMEN to excel.
Today’s so-called “feminists” want nothing less than the enslavement of women to their cause through fear and ignorance…demanding their strict adherence and obedience to their (Marxist)agenda—which is the death of freedom for all people…including WOMEN.
While we are hysterical about Abortion, Racism, Homophobia, etc. they are behind our backs busy stripping away more and more of our fundamental American rights of freedom and independence, by the consolidation of more and more power in a centralized and invasive Federal government. They seek nothing less than totalitarianism.
And as we focus on our single-issues, they are winning.
Sarah Palin is not on the plantation. And that’s why they hate her. They will do whatever it takes to destroy this shining example of a woman succeeding without them. If all women started to believe in themselves as Palin does, the Left would lose one of their most useful constituencies.
And that’s why they will say ANYTHING about her. If damning facts cannot be found, they will be invented. This is a fight for the very survival of the Left in America. They used the same tactics against Clarence Thomas. A Black off the reservation is just as threatening.
The pattern is obvious for anyone who is willing to see it. Liberal Blacks and Women are the ONLY ones tolerated by the sol-called “feminists” and “racial justice” crowd.
They don’t care about women and blacks per se, only as they are obedient, convenient and useful pawns in the greater war to rule America.
Sep 13, 2008 - 10:06 am 88. view from afar:I didn’t realize that our US constitution covered the whole world, so why would we hold the read them their rights thing for non-US citizens? On a French police show they even make fun of the read ém their rights stuff…wake up please
Sep 13, 2008 - 11:04 am 89. view from afar:oops sent too fast, forgot to add this: I agree with both the author and the gunslinger…and another writer further up who wrote, women’s rights are for women to be able to decide that yeah they want to work outside the home, or that they want to stay home, or a little of each,or whatever they want. While I personally am anti abortion, some people aren’t against it or feel they have no choices left(I don’t agree, but whatever)but there needs to be the availability of choice, and to agree or not…why give up one form of nonchoice to take on any other form of nonchoice? Go Sarah Palin!
Sep 13, 2008 - 11:25 am 90. Ed Wallis:Something to brighten up a real feminist’s day (sorry, Ms. Lazy, you’ve had your day in the sun…err…daughter…):
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/13/gingrich-calls-palin-threat-to-feminists-slams-med/
Sep 13, 2008 - 12:29 pm 91. kathyfromkansas:“If Palin is a Law and Order candidate then she might be good on the issue of domestic violence; rape; incest; child pedophiles; and sexual harassment.”
Ironic, then, isn’t it that the only “dirt” the Obama campaign has been able to dig up on Palin is that she fired a department chief who refused to fire a cop who had tasered his own 11-year-old stepson and made death threats against his own wife and her father. Sarah Palin’s catching all kinds of grief precisely because she has zero tolerance for domestic violence!
Sep 18, 2008 - 6:31 pm