Palin Goes Rogue on Feminism

[Rolfe]

Of all the criticisms of Palin, this one rings among the hollowest. Palin is not universally admired, but she is still very popular among a lot of people. Whatever your opinion of Palin or the people who like her, "the whole world" is rather obviously not laughing at her or her supporters, because a big chunk of the world is those supporters. Them's the facts, fool, however much you might wish it were otherwise. And sticking your head in the sand and pretending that everyone laughs along with you won't change that.

Just reminded me of an article in today's paper.

[....] And there she is, folks. Sarah Palin. The poster girl for breathtaking idiocy. This gimlet-eyed, egomaniacal half-wit is surfing the wave towards a presidential campaign largely on the back of her religion. Her supporters, above all, paint her as a “woman of faith”. Palin’s faith is a most peculiar kind of Christianity. Jesus would have been unlikely to be a fervent supporter of the National Rifle Association, of which Palin is a lifetime member, given that he was apparently keen on not killing people. Palin disagrees with her god and thinks all households should have guns, including semi-automatic weapons with which to kill people more efficiently. She also thinks women should not have abortions and she has time for creationism as an alternative theory to Darwinism. She believes that men should be the head of the household, that homosexuality is just plain wrong and gay marriage should be abolished; that some books may be morally bad for people and shouldn’t be easily available; that health care should not be universal for all; and that global warming is just a theory because it interferes with her pipeline plans in Alaska.

But let’s be clear. Palin is no Thomas More, ready to die for her beliefs. As with Bush, much of her religious posturing is constantly revealed as hypocrisy or self-serving convenience. In other words Palin is a thoroughly nasty little piece of work who wants to bring a repressive, right-wing religious agenda back into the White House and curtail the freedoms of her fellow citizens, but since she has neither the intellect nor the poise of Obama to help her she is travelling instead on the ticket of the folksy supernatural.

But let’s ask again. How can a country so smart in so many other ways be so stupid as to take this individual seriously? Who are these people who turn out in their thousands to support her? What intelligence gap has occurred in this supremely clever country that leaves them open to such blatantly moronic posturing? Have they learned nothing whatsoever from the tidal wave of global destruction their last educationally subnormal evangelist launched from Washington? If we in Europe are going to have to fight against the threat of a new religious repression, that the wonderful Peter Tatchell rails against, we are going to need the Americans’ help. Wouldn’t it be tricky if that threat came from them?

Maybe laughing isn't the right word. But however many "admirers" she has in America, I don't think "a big chunk" of anywhere else is falling at her feet.

Rolfe.

 

[Eyeron]

Why can't people support some, but not all, of the goals of the feminist movement?

Which feminist movement?

 

[mhaze]

No surprise there: she's dangerous to the Republican establishment, because she comes from outside it, has no allegiance to it, and is willing to oppose it. It's not just democrats who view her as a potential threat.

Yep, she is dangerous...note the following from March 2009:

Gov. Sarah Palin on Wednesday picked an Anchorage judge to fill the latest vacancy on the Alaska Supreme Court despite efforts by a conservative Christian group to convince her to do otherwise.

Anchorage Superior Court Judge Morgan Christen, on the bench since 2002, will be just the second woman named to the high court in the 50 years since statehood.

"Alaska's Supreme Court bears the awesome responsibility of ensuring that our court system administers justice in firm accordance with the principles laid down in our state Constitution," Palin said in a written statement. "I have every confidence that Judge Christen has the experience, intellect, wisdom and character to be an outstanding Supreme Court justice."
​

Morgan Christen, a former Planned Parenthold board member and one who was very much opposed by the religious right.

More likely that Palin thinks independantly, and won't toe a party line, than that she fits the stereotypes that are trying to be shoved on her.

 

[Ziggurat]

Maybe laughing isn't the right word. But however many "admirers" she has in America, I don't think "a big chunk" of anywhere else is falling at her feet.

Doesn't matter. A big chunk of America is still a big chunk of the world.

Oh, and your choice of links? It's rather pathetic, in fact. It's filled with rather obvious strawmen. For example, the claim that "Palin disagrees with her god and thinks all households should have guns" is a lie. That's not her position, and it's not the position of the NRA.

Really, Rolfe, you're smarter than this. I know you don't like Palin, and you're certainly entitled to not like her. She's not above criticism. But do you have to make such criticism so transparently pathetic? Surely you can do better than the fool did. It's really kind of sad to see so many people shut their brains off when they start attacking Palin.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Doesn't matter. A big chunk of America is still a big chunk of the world.

The USA has approximately 5% of the world's population.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

The USA has approximately 5% of the world's population.

And her supporters don't comprise a big chunk of the U.S. population. So we're talking about a minority of 5% of the world's population (i.e. substantially less than 50% of 5%).

 

[MontagK505]

Bad analogy. A better one would be someone who loves the American revolution, but hates Washington, Jefferson, the Minutemen, etc.



The contradiction is in celebrating the results of feminism, and trash-talking the people who got those results.

You have to understand the mind-set. If it helps me, it's a great moral good.
If it helps someone I don't like it's bad.

Simple isn't it.

 

[Meadmaker]

Which feminist movement?

And that's a good point, too. (Of course, it isn't sufficiently detailed to know what you were actually thinking, so I'll project my thoughts onto your statement, and it will be a good point.)

The changed status of women in today's society was brought about by a heck of a lot of different people, and many of them claim the feminist mantle despite holding opposite views on some issues. NOW and similar groups were one part of a coalition that helped bring about that change. It's inaccurate for someone to say that she is criticizing the people who brought about that change.

 

[Eyeron]

I wasn't trying to make a point, I just wanted to know which style of feminism you were referring to because i was little confused.

 

[Ziggurat]

The USA has approximately 5% of the world's population.

Did I say anything about a majority? No, I believe I did not. But, say, 40 million people is still a big chunk. There are lots of big chunks of the world, because the world is very big. Not to mention that if you really want to take this approach, then it STILL doesn't rescue the fool's claim, because much (and perhaps even an absolute majority) of the world probably doesn't even have an opinion of Sarah Palin, and so wouldn't be laughing at her or her supporters.

 

[kellyb]

Did I say anything about a majority? No, I believe I did not. But, say, 40 million people is still a big chunk. There are lots of big chunks of the world, because the world is very big. Not to mention that if you really want to take this approach, then it STILL doesn't rescue the fool's claim, because much (and perhaps even an absolute majority) of the world probably doesn't even have an opinion of Sarah Palin, and so wouldn't be laughing at her or her supporters.

Would it be fair to say a vast majority of the developed world finds her interesting in a hilarious way, then?

 

[Ziggurat]

Would it be fair to say a vast majority of the developed world finds her interesting in a hilarious way, then?

If you've got polls showing something to that effect, yes. If that's just your suspicion, well, that's not really very authoritative. And if popular opinion, especially an imagined one, is what you base your own evaluation of Palin on, that would be kind of sad.

 

[Rolfe]

Doesn't matter. A big chunk of America is still a big chunk of the world.

Oh, and your choice of links? It's rather pathetic, in fact. It's filled with rather obvious strawmen. For example, the claim that "Palin disagrees with her god and thinks all households should have guns" is a lie. That's not her position, and it's not the position of the NRA.

Really, Rolfe, you're smarter than this. I know you don't like Palin, and you're certainly entitled to not like her. She's not above criticism. But do you have to make such criticism so transparently pathetic? Surely you can do better than the fool did. It's really kind of sad to see so many people shut their brains off when they start attacking Palin.

Even quite a big chunk of America is a tiny minority of the world.

If you don't like Muriel Gray's article, don't read it. It's an example of what's being published in the non-US press. I doubt if you'd find a single admiring article about Palin outside the USA. And "not-the-USA" does actually comprise quite a big chunk of the world.

Rolfe.

 

[MRC_Hans]

*snip* And "not-the-USA" does actually comprise quite a big chunk of the world.

Rolfe.

Something which, for some strange reason, seems to be an endless source of surprise for a great many USA citizens

Hans

 

[Ziggurat]

If you don't like Muriel Gray's article, don't read it. It's an example of what's being published in the non-US press. I doubt if you'd find a single admiring article about Palin outside the USA.

Quite the rigorous sampling method you've got going there, Rolfe.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Of all the criticisms of Palin, this one rings among the hollowest. Palin is not universally admired, but she is still very popular among a lot of people. Whatever your opinion of Palin or the people who like her, "the whole world" is rather obviously not laughing at her or her supporters, because a big chunk of the world is those supporters. Them's the facts, fool, however much you might wish it were otherwise. And sticking your head in the sand and pretending that everyone laughs along with you won't change that.

Sure if you think between Palin supporters and 9/11 conspiracy believers you have about 50% of the country right there.

Her problem here is that she is incapable of articulating a nuanced position.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I think this is an example of the fallacy of the excluded middle. Why can't people support some, but not all, of the goals of the feminist movement?

There is no problem with that. The problem is that she is no where near articulate enough to present such a position. Is there any evidence that she has ever presented a nuanced position on anything?

 

[Francesca R]

I doubt if you'd find a single admiring article about Palin outside the USA.

This isn't overwhelmingly admiring, but it's probably at least reasonably balanced. http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14915160

Some women think her feminism is fake. But others are inspired by the way she has juggled five kids and a career. When she first joined the Wasilla city council, she found it full of patronising old men. But she took her baby daughter to meetings, breastfed her while recording radio spots and “didn’t care too much what the good ol’ boys said about it.” She made enemies the right way—by shaking up the corrupt culture of her own party. And when she was elected the first female governor of America’s most lopsidedly male state, she worked well with Democrats, largely avoiding divisive social issues in favour of practical ones, such as oil and gas. At one point she was America’s most popular governor, in that nearly 90% of Alaskans approved of her. But all that changed when Senator John McCain thrust her into the national spotlight.

 

[Rolfe]

Quite the rigorous sampling method you've got going there, Rolfe.

It the sampling method of "what I read in yesterday's paper". If I'd read a piece praising Palin, I'd have mentioned it. I haven't, not yesterday and not in the time since she first came to international attention.

Even the one Francesca found, is more "balanced" than admiring, and most of the positive things are simply giving reasons why she is popular among some segmnents of the US population.

Rolfe.

 

[Meadmaker]

I think the Economist piece shows that she was doing great in her niche, but she just wasn't ready for prime time.

I'm not sure that that, by itself, is a knock against her. I think US presidential politics is pretty ridiculous, with the "gotcha" politics, sound bites, the fake scandals, and the general tendency toward muckraking. Still, like it or not, those are the rules, and she couldn't play them very well.