Results matching “Bristol Palin”

Seems that some people are upset that one of the models on Teen Vogue's November cover is pregnant.

19 year-old Jourdan Dunn isn't visibly pregnant, but talks about her pregnancy in the magazine.

The cover has raised eyebrows among some parents, teens and advocates against teen pregnancy.

"There's no message to send to them that that's not OK. Maybe if she's on the cover to tell them 'Be careful,' that's one thing," said Catherine Essig, a 19-year-old sophomore at Dallas' Southern Methodist University, who was concerned about 15- and 16-year-old readers.

Many advocates said parents should use the cover as a way to talk to their kids about sex and the importance of planning pregnancies for the right moment in their lives.

"Teen parenting isn't glamorous, even if you are a teen model," said Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Association.

First of all, I'm not sure why this magazine cover is scandalous and this one isn't. Teen pregnancy is talked about and featured everywhere - from glamorized pics of Bristol Palin to MTV''s 16 and Pregnant. And the fact is, the teen pregnancy is a reality - the teen pregnancy rate in the U.S. went up for the second year in a row for the first time in a decade (thanks, abstinence-only education!). Is it really better to hide the issue?

I understand concerns about making teen pregnancy seem "cool," but I don't think that shaming young women who are pregnant or ignoring their existence is an answer. As Teen Vogue Editor-in-Chief Amy Astley said, "Teen pregnancy is a difficult, real-life issue that Teen Vogue readers (with an average age of 18) are mature enough to be exposed to...[we] felt it was important to support, not punish, Jourdan." Agreed.

I don't care about Sarah Palin, but given what I do I am forced to read and think about her much more often than I would like to. Similar to Amanda, I don't think of Palin is a martyr or someone who was so heinously treated by the media that we should pity her in any way. I have yet to see any evidence of her being humbled about being wrong and an asshole, and while attacks against her have also been sexist, that is not the bulk of criticism around her. Palin hates women (at least that is what is apparent through the little legislation she has worked on) and has used her teenage daughter to score political points, only one of her many asshole moves. And frankly, using your teenage (mom) daughter for political gain, while stuffing words in her mouth about abstinence, well that doesn't score very high on the feminist scale.

I was especially struck by this rather optimistic (or misguided, I am not sure) piece by Michel Martin at NPR about how complicated Palin is.

Can I just tell you? I do not know a single working mother who does not dream at some point, even if just for a minute, about packing up that desk and heading for the homestead, even if that fantasy is about as realistic as the one about supplementing unemployment with Powerball winnings. And I bet that's why so many mothers, who work outside the home or not, were rooting for Sarah Palin, at least at first.

Whether you shared her politics or not, Palin was somebody you wanted to see in the game, trying as she was to balance a very demanding job with the equally demanding job of raising five children and maintaining a decent relationship with her husband. She seemed to have so many attractive qualities. She seemed practical, honest, unfazed and down-to-earth, exactly the qualities people hope newcomers in general and hopefully women will bring to public life. And she is making no judgment at all about the whole campaign shopping spree thing, stylish, which I for one appreciate.

I never felt any of this. I never wanted to see Palin succeed and I certainly didn't think of her as a good mother, especially after she unapologetically used Bristol's story for her own political gain and I have no doubt she will continue to do so. Maybe I can't relate since I don't sit at home wishing to be a stay-at-home cat mom, but I think this romantic idea that Palin is somehow quitting the Governorship for familial reasons is giving her way more credit than she has proven to deserve. I for one am not looking forward to her future political moves because I know they are only going to aggravate me further. Not to be too pessimistic or anything, haha.

Dave Letterman made a bad joke. Here is him talking about it.

Whoops, bad joke and a PR fail as he will lose to the angry antis that are ready to cry sexism on their ideal future of feminism, her majesty Ms. Palin. Yes, I think it is funny that people who clearly do not support full human rights for women, decry sexist jokes. That said, his jokes were in bad taste at best. Megan at Jezebel writes,

David Letterman's "jokes" about Palin's daughters -- which, as Rachel Sklar pointed out today, Barack Obama suggested people stop doing last September -- struck me last week as pathetic and gross. Just because he said it was supposedly about Bristol -- you know, 'cause she's obviously "slutty" or something -- doesn't make it ok. Just because you don't like Sarah Palin or think she's using it to score political points with her base doesn't excuse the jokes in retrospect. On this point, Anna and I vociferously disagree -- I think it's pretty easy to defend Sarah Palin because I don't want those jokes told about the Obama girls; because I've commented repeatedly on how shitty it was when Rush Limbaugh and John McCain made them about Chelsea Clinton; and because I come from a family and a background where you just don't stand for people insulting your family or your friends. Maybe she's playing it up -- she is, after all, a politician and every politician is going to try for a homer on an easy pitch like Letterman handed her -- and maybe she's pissed (the fact that Todd Palin said anything after months of basically being told to keep his trap shut is, to me, telling) that Letterman went there, sexually with her daughters. Either way, I still think it's gross and indefensible.

I have no problem saying that Sarah Palin is a jerk because of her politics, yet I don't think it is OK to make sexist jokes about her or her daughters. Amanda Hess does a good job deconstructing the following debate between Huffington Post's Katharine Zaleski and the Washington Times' Amanda Carpenter discussing Letterman's joke.

Letterman apologized last night and while I think Letterman's jokes were in poor taste, let's not forget that Palin's actual stance that has been legislated and made into policy is far worse. Does this make joking about her or her daughters OK? Definitely not. But watching those two women duke it out, I think it is so interesting listening to conservative women use feminist talking points. It is smart and calculated and plays so well into the often rudimentary understanding Americans have about the fight for women's rights.

Remember when Bristol Palin basically admitted that abstinence doesn't work? Well, sounds like she (or rather her mom on her behalf) is singing a different tune now and I am going to have to agree with Renee that there is something fishy, sad and manipulative about using your teenage daughter to further your political agenda.

In response to Levi Johnson being on the Tyra Show yesterday discussing openly that the Palin's knew they were knocking boots, Sarah Palin released the following statement:

"Bristol's focus will remain on raising Tripp, completing her education, and advocating abstinence," [spokeswoman Meghan] Stapleton continues. "It is unfortunate that Levi finds it more appealing to exploit his previous relationship with Bristol than to contribute to the well being of the child."

See Levi's clip from the Tyra Show here.

Seriously, they didn't have safe sex every time? And here I thought it was immaculate conception (/sarcasm) As one commenter remarked at Renee's place, Levi is effectively getting out of being a father. While his story holds more water and helps us understand what bullshit abstinence-only is, he ends up benefiting from this very same conservative doctrine and it is at the cost of Bristol Palin's ability to advocate for herself. Between what her mother wants and her baby-daddy walking away, she ends up without an effective narrative to support her story. Both frames of "abstinence-only" and the "the dad that walked away" are stories well fleshed out and justified by the right. Abstinence-only dogma hurts the very thing it claims to protect; the lives of young women.

Related:
Bristol Palin lost her Voice and her Autonomy.

I feel bad for her. Her story was used by her family and the GOP to make an example of what is considered "responsible" behavior for a teen mom. Holding all that, she is telling the truth that abstinence is not realistic for young people, even if it should be what everyone strives for. Comprehensive sex-ed wouldn't be this unrealistic.

via Gawker.

(h/t to Aaron)

This is an oldie-but-goodie; Samantha Bee reflects on her discovery at the RNC that there's a new c-word that's not to be uttered. Transcript below the jump.

Now this is rich. Kevin Burke, a proponent of the invented "post abortion syndrome," writes that the criticism of Sarah Palin "may have a relationship to the collective grief, shame, and guilt from personal involvement in the abortion of an unborn child." Here I thought voters made decisions based on the issues that matter to them - little did I know that women across the country who don't support Palin are simply depressed about all of those abortions we've been having!

Burke gets even classier when he brings Palin's pregnant teen daughter into the mix:

If Bristol Palin had quietly aborted, Sarah Palin would have been spared the politically untimely focus on this very personal family issue. The problem would have quietly gone away. But Bristol, like countless post abortive women, would have paid a high price to protect her mother from the political heat that her pregnancy brings to the campaign. We know from our work with thousands of women who feel pressured to abort for various reasons that she would surely suffer many of the common post-abortion symptoms; depression, promiscuity, drug and alcohol abuse, sleep disorders, and relational problems. But she would have suffered in silence; no one would know her secret. No one would acknowledge that she has reason to grieve or have symptoms after abortion. Sarah Palin would have lost not only her precious grandchild...she likely would have lost her daughter Bristol to the silent ravages of post abortion suffering.

Wow, given that one in three American women will have an abortion in her lifetime - there must be millions of tired, addicted, slutty, depressed, single women running around voting Democrat!

Seriously, conservatives need to get their heads out of their asses - and out of our uteruses. (Sorry, not the best visual.)

Jezebel: Teen Moms Displeased At Double Standard Glorifying Bristol Palin & Jamie Lynn Spears

Genevieve at UneFemmePlusCourageuse catalogs the pro-rape "flair" on Facebook. (Via)

There have been a series of attacks on gay and trans students at Washington State University. (Via)

Sara calls out Palin for giving domestic terrorists a pass.

Fatemeh wrote An Open Letter to White Non-Muslim Western Feminists.

Chicago Defender: "Domestic Violence Hits Black Women Harder"

Mable F. Yee: How Can 30+ Million Women Be Invisible? (Also see Celina's interview with Mable.)

Religion Dispatches: A Woman Leads Muslim Prayer in Britain For the First Time

A new anti-rape campaign in Scotland takes on the "she was asking for it because..." excuse.

Actions and Events

Oct. 29: Attention bloggers! Participate in Write to Marry day to oppose Prop 8.

Oct. 30: Be Bold, Wear Red to protest violence against women of color. (Cara has more.)

Oct. 31 - April 5: Brooklyn Museum exhibition: Burning Down the House: Building a Feminist Art Collection

What else have you all been reading/writing this week? Leave links in comments...

I was really happy to see this article on white privilege and politics over at Alternet today. It seems that in the hub bub that is Palin and all her faux feminism, the media has all but forgotten the racial dynamics at play in this presidential election. An excerpt from the piece:

White privilege is when you can get pregnant at 17 like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because "every family has challenges," even as black and Latino families with similar "challenges" are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.

Yeah, because you fail to see white privilege. Unpack the knapsack people.

Cara had a great post last week on how annoyed she was that antichoicers were portraying Sarah Palin's child with Down's syndrome as a heroic choice on the part of the vice-presidential candidate. Cara writes,

You know, it's the anti-choicers who use "it's not a choice, it's a child" as a rallying cry to force women to give birth. And yet here I am, as pro-choice as can be, really fucking annoyed that conservative assholes are portraying this very real, actual child as a political choice rather than the human being that he is.

Now today comes the news that Palin's 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, is pregnant. In the news release, the McCain campaign made sure to state that:

Bristol Palin made the decision on her own to keep the baby, McCain aides said.

While it's obvious why they made this statement to assure the public that Bristol was not coerced into keeping the baby (after all, she does have a parent who is a staunch opponent of the right to choose and is currently on the Republican presidential ticket), as my significant other pointed out, there's some serious hypocrisy at play here. I mean, John McCain and Sarah Palin don't believe women have a right to choose. It's absolutely absurd for the campaign to emphasize the fact that Bristol "made this decision," and then push for policies that take away that choice.

In reality, Bristol's actual "choice" was probably not whether to terminate the pregnancy or carry it to term, but whether raise the child herself or put it up for adoption. But the reason that the McCain campaign chose to emphasize Bristol's agency in this decision was to reassure the public that this pregnancy is not coercive. They know the public wants to feel secure in the knowledge that it was Bristol's choice to keep the pregnancy. And coming from the McCain campaign, which opposes a woman's right to choose, that statement is disgusting. As Kate Sheppard wrote in In These Times recently, during the 2000 primary McCain said that if his daughter got pregnant it would be a "family decision":

"The final decision would be made by Meghan with our advice and counsel," McCain said, referring to himself and his wife, Cindy. When reporters suggested that this view made him, in fact, pro-choice, McCain became irritated. "I don't think it is the pro-choice position to say that my daughter and my wife and I will discuss something that is a family matter that we have to decide."

In other words: My family and my daughter deserve a choice, but no other woman can be trusted with this decision. This fits nicely with the narrative on both Palin's decision to carry her Down's syndrome child to term and her daughter's decision to carry her own pregnancy to term. Their decisions are seen by the antichoice Republican base as affirmation that Palin shares their values. But the underlying message that each woman had a choice is a validation of pro-choice values.