Warning: Potential Category IV Twit Principle Violations Forecast Coast to Coast
Melissa McEwan of Shakesville issues a (disappointingly necessary) reminder
For the record, there is plenty about which to criticize Palin that has absolutely fuck-all to do with her sex. She's anti-choice, against marriage equality, pro-death penalty, pro-guns, and loves Big Business. (In other words, she's a Republican.) There's no goddamned reason to criticize her for anything but her policies. She said it here.
Remember the Twit Principle: superficial criticism (about age, orientation, gender, or who did or didn't have what kind of sex) displaces substantive criticism.
Conservatives would love, love, love to spend the next two months defending Sarah Palin from sexist attacks because every minute they spend defending her looks, or gender, or experience is a minute they don't have to spend defending their indefensible record on... *everything single other thing* about her, her history, positions and policies, John McCain and *his* history, position and policies, and their party and it's history, position, and policies.
I hope that someone in Obama's camp or the national media will point out that it is BECAUSE of Roe v. Wade that Sarah Palin was able to EXERCISE her Right to Choose by choosing to give birth. Most people don't know that the Supreme Court acknowledged, in PP v. Casey (1992), that WITHOUT Roe, the government would have the power to FORCE abortions, so to control population growth or to reduce welfare and/or health care costs.
["Sarah Palin was able to EXERCISE her Right to Choose..." Right. And similarly in, say, China, we're *also* not allowed to *choose.* It's not so much *what* you choose that's fundamental as *that* you *can.* I wish more people on her side got that. Thanks, MP. --fl]
I noticed that a lot of conservative women act as if they use gender(?) as a diversion, wielding power while looking like Barbie. They also want to determine what other womens lives should be while some how they can do what they want, aka Phyllis Schlafly. I will go there, hyper-femininity is important to Palin, otherwise why would her body been air brushed on Vogue to look like the dolls. She had had four kids, for goodness sake.
I don't think gender is the word I want, but can't express t any other way at this time.
[*Using* one's gender says it pretty well although I think I'd call it taking on and exploiting the trappings of "femininity" instead. But yeah, it's like the idea behind those old Bugs Bunny cartoons where by wearing feminine dresses and wagging his hips the rabbit distracts the hunter into putting himself at risk of physical harm: one more tool for the toolbox. Incidentally I don't know enough about Palin to say what her position on such tactics might be. *But* I strongly feel the *McCain camp* may have let such considerations sway them to choose her over other more obvious, but equally outrageously wingnut options. Thanks, Five. --fl]
I have read that picture of Palin on the cover of Vogue is bogus. Having read Vogue for many years, I can't imagine that the pictures, published at Huffington Post would be the only ones Vogue would take and publish, so I tried looking them up on the Vogue website. Its really weird. Some one noted on the site's forum that all the pictures had been removed recently. I just may take a trip to the library.
[Interesting. I guess her handlers are going around tidying up her history *and* trying to clean up some of her political and/or legal problems in Alaska as well. It'll probably be a lot harder to track down actual print archives of stuff though. Thanks, Five. --fl]