End the Mommy Wars

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: jpigeon64 @ 09/03/2008 2:34:35 PM

    I think everyone missed the point,.........this is not about how Palin handles her family. It's about the fact that we are a country that judges women so much more harshly than men. If a man in this position was running for Vice President on either ticket you would not hear a peep from anyone. Everyone is also acting as though Palin's husband is an idiot and can't manage anything. The man must have parenting skills or they never would have made it so far succesfully. I would imagine he will be stepping up to the plate a lot as Ms. Palin makes her run in the election. Teenage kids are going to explore their sexuality whether they receive sex education or not. Some will get pregnant and some won't, it's really the luck of the draw. I think it's better for them to know what they are getting into when having sex. Finally, we as a nation need to focus on treating men and women candidates with the same respect level at all times including the election process.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 09/03/2008 2:42:07 PM

      If a male VP candidate preached abstinence-only, and his teen daughter got knocked up, you better believe there would be an uproar.

      • Posted By: kas_wolf @ 09/03/2008 2:53:45 PM

        Really? What about a male VP candidate who knocked up another woman while his wife was dying? Edwards fits that bill - and he was on Obama's short list.

        What about a male President who cheats in the WHITE HOUSE with a political aide? Clinton fit that bill.

        So, Palin isn't qualified? Seems like a double standard.

        • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 09/03/2008 3:11:14 PM

          First off, I thought you were talking about Newt Gingrich for a moment. I guess you mean Edwards.

          The revelations about Edwards eliminated him from consideration, as it should have.

          The problem isn't the sex, it's the right-wing policies of Sarah Palin. Palin preaches that abstinence-only education works. We now have living proof that it doesn't. It helps to illuminate the utter bankruptcy of the right's policies.

          Think of Ted Haggard. Here's a guy that preaches against gays and it turns out that he's a closet gay with a meth habit. The problem isn't that he's gay. The problem is the hypocrisy.

          If Clinton had been a monogamy crusader and then was revealed to be a philanderer, then you might have something.

  • Posted By: kas_wolf @ 09/03/2008 2:38:34 PM

    Main Entry: Hypocrisy
    hy·poc·ri·sy
    Pronunciation:
    \hi-??pä-kr??-s?? also h??-\
    Middle English ypocrisie, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin hypocrisis, from Greek hypokrisis
    1: a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion
    2: an act or instance of hypocrisy

    As it is abundantly clear that some here don't understand their use of the term "hypocrisy" or its meaning - let's look at the definition - and the actions.

    Palin is not a hypocrite. She would be a hypocrite IF she advocated "abstinence only" and sent her daughter to a sex education class someplace. What she is happens to be a good mother caught in a tough situation.

    Her daughter, at 17 years old didn't listen to every word her mother said. She acted on her own - and in direct conflict with her mother's teachings and she got pregnant. Now her mother is supporting her - and acting in support of her beliefs and stand on the issue. In other words, she is walking the walk.

    That is not hypocrisy. I know many on the "let's bash Palin and her family" side have no idea what the word for their actions may be. It is called integrity.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 09/03/2008 2:40:12 PM

      Her daughter should have been given contraception. Unless you can show me where Palin gave her contraception and the girl didn't use it, Palin's still on the hook for her hypocrisy.

      • Posted By: kas_wolf @ 09/03/2008 2:43:26 PM

        IF she had given her daughter contraception THEN she would have acted with hypocrisy. Get the definition and the application of the word correct.

        • Posted By: GustoMaybe @ 09/03/2008 2:54:59 PM

          She is a part of Feminists for Life, which is fine with contraception. No hypocrisy there.

          • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 09/03/2008 3:05:27 PM

            Did she give her daughter contraception? Somehow, I doubt it.

        • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 09/03/2008 2:50:53 PM

          Nope. She thinks that abstinence-only education works. It doesn't. Her family is proof. Yet, she wants to take away that education from every child in the nation. Magnify Bristol's situation by 1 million.

          I think this shows that the right's agenda really is "procreation first". They don't really care about teen sex as long as that sex results in children. That's deep down why they are really against contraception.

          • Posted By: GustoMaybe @ 09/03/2008 2:57:05 PM

            I'm not a religious person, but that's very naive to say.

            • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 09/03/2008 3:05:02 PM

              It's not naive. It's based on observation. It helps explain why they are so against contraception, even though it's proven more effective than abstinence-only education. I used to buy into the line that they didn't like sex ed because it encourages teens to have sex. This case has called that into question.

      • Posted By: lionguy73 @ 09/03/2008 2:56:30 PM

        If she was given contraception, that flies in the face of the abstinence philosophy. Therefore, Mrs. Palin is NOT a hypocrite.

  • Posted By: msdalloway @ 09/03/2008 2:18:55 PM

    I totally agree with you! Unfortunately, this is the irony that comes with being a women, and desiring to acheive the accolades of a man. I feel that the majority of the pressure we feel as we try to acheive this level, is more from our own sex and less from the men we are in competion with, and that is sad; sad to think that we females are actually holding our sex back from going even further. No wonder some men don't want to work with us, we are catty, two faced, and hypocritical!

    • Posted By: Vesper2 @ 09/03/2008 3:00:45 PM

      I'd be happy with the equal pay that a man earns. They can keep their accolades, but it would be nice to be refered to as "assertive" instead of "bitch".

  • Posted By: kshephard @ 09/03/2008 2:58:07 PM

    Don't children need their fathers just as much as they need their mothers? I think so. Should we ask if Obama can handle the job of President and still have time for his daughters? What a double standard.
    Oh, and how many of you have had sex as teenagers? Yea, I thought so. You just didn't get caught or get pregnant. Get over it!

  • Posted By: severinidesta @ 09/03/2008 2:56:55 PM

    I am all for women who have a career and want to contribute to society, but did anyone notice her pregnant daughter is always holding Gov.Palin baby and not the FATHER. Whose currently/going to be handling the children, if McCAIN/PALIN wins? I know it's not Sarah Palin. Seem to me that her family is least important, especially during a troubled time for both her and the country.

  • Posted By: hollyp @ 09/03/2008 2:54:48 PM

    Palin put her choice to give birth to a child with special needs out there as a sign of her character. Why then should we disallow discussion of her other parenting choices?

  • Posted By: bob parden @ 09/03/2008 2:54:13 PM

    The worse part--does she know what DC is like in the summer? rjp

  • Posted By: Vicki's View @ 09/03/2008 2:36:09 PM

    This is about choices ??? Sarah Palin???s and John McCain???s.

    First ??? and this relates directly to Ms. Deveny???s article ??? there is the issue of the choices faced by Sarah and Bristol Palin. Being pro-choice, I can understand and, indeed, find laudable Governor Palin???s decision to have her latest child. One has to wonder, however, about Bristol???s ???choice??? to have her baby and to marry someone who might not make the best father and husband. To what degree was that ???choice??? forced on young Bristol by her very ambitious mother? Governor Palin???s decision to plod ahead with a national political campaign ??? a campaign she must have known would shine a bright spotlight of publicity on a daughter in crisis ??? speaks volumes about the Governor???s priorities and, yes Ms. Deveny, her mommy skills.

    The second point relates to Mr. McCain???s choice - forced on him by the ???Base??? that smeared him in 2000. It has been described as a ???bold gamble.??? But, one must ask, a ???bold gamble??? with what? It???s one thing to gamble ??? boldly - with the future of a political campaign; it???s entirely another thing to gamble ??? recklessly ??? with the future of our country. Is it his to gamble with?

    ???Boldly,??? by the way, connotates ???strength.??? But Senator McCain???s caving in to the expediency of winning at any price reeks of weakness ??? the sort of weakness that throws into question the entire narrative of courage being woven around him. Courage, after all, is not just physical.

    Yes, there???s one more choice that needs mentioning ??? ours!


    • Posted By: kas_wolf @ 09/03/2008 2:41:19 PM

      Vicki - myriad women throughout history have married men who turned out to be poor fathers - and poor husbands. It is called love - and sometimes it prevails. That is called commitment.

      Let's hope Bristol Palin has both in this young man.

      • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 09/03/2008 2:52:01 PM

        The statistics show that shotgun weddings rarely are healthy. Bristol might beat the odds, but it's not likely.

  • Posted By: SSBeers @ 09/03/2008 2:49:38 PM

    It is good to finally see a woman stick for woman's rights not just Democratic woman's rights. Well written

  • Posted By: Jonni @ 09/03/2008 2:47:28 PM

    I agree that one should normally remain tolerant about another family's parenting choices, but not this time. Palin makes her own parenting style open to public debate when she advocates laws that would force her choices on other American families. If we need to decide if we should accept her anti-abortion stance and her opposition to sex education, we have a right to see how those ideas have worked out within her own family.

  • Posted By: ithinkspeak @ 09/03/2008 2:47:09 PM

    I find it difficult to criticize Palin's career and family choices. I know I could not accomplish what she has while raising a family of five. While a child's behavior may reflect somewhat on a person's ability to parent, the child still has a free will to choose their own actions. I don't know a child anywhere who obeys completely, regardless of what they are taught.
    I think the main issue is Palin's parenting techniques should not be the criteria by which she is judged suitable or unsuitable for the position for which she is being considered. Rather, the American public should consider her leadership and decision making abilities as well as her track record in previous positions.
    Let's be grown up about this. How about instead of the catty name calling, we take a serious look at the person's credentials beliefs, and abilities.

  • Posted By: dsmb2007 @ 09/03/2008 2:43:39 PM

    I think it's time to stop discussing Palin's family and background as well. We've seen and heard enough over the past few days to know full well that John McCain made a rushed, misguided, flat out wrong choice in choosing her, not through any fault of Palin's. There is no need to throw mud on her name when it is McCain's decision making that should bear responsibility. McCain is the only one who can stop the discussion by getting her out of the national spotlight. That's what he needs to do. Then we can stop discussing her every fault.

  • Posted By: shortjames @ 09/03/2008 2:37:32 PM

    So Sarah Palin gets a free ride after 18 months of intense media scrutiny of McCain, Biden and Obama.
    That is about the worst idea Ive heard all election. Intensive media scrutiny is entirely appropriate given the nominees late entry into the contest.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 09/03/2008 2:41:03 PM

      You are correct. The press shouldn't let up. They have a job to do.

  • Posted By: Womanvoter @ 09/03/2008 2:40:23 PM

    Dems are not attacking Ms. Palin's parenting, nor are they attacking her daughter. The furor centers around the question of Gov. Palin's ability to do the job based on her lack of experience and her extreme ideologies. I was the vice-mayor of a small town for 8 years and I know what it takes. Believe me, it is NO preparation for being VP and possibly Pres!

    We also question McCain's decision making ability. It is clear that he did not vet this candidate. He made a snap judgement after he was told he could not choose Leiberman. By the way, if he were a real maverick, wouldn't he have choosn the VP he really wanted? Instead he gave in to pressure from the far right.

    McCain is no maverick. Nor is he a good decision maker. Unfortunately, Ms. Palin's nomination is a clear
    illustration of that. The Republican's are begging everyone to back off - not because they are concened about Bristol - but because they are terrified that McCain's decision will ultimately blow up in their faces. If Palin or McCain really cared so much about Bristol, they would not have thrust her into the national spotlight in the way they did.

    Enough hypocracy.

  • Posted By: derik @ 09/03/2008 2:39:40 PM

    hmm, as a guy I did not take maternity leave. My spouse took six months. She was probably fine after a week (after 72-hours she was somewhat tired). Either way; not being the one doing the birthing, I was somewhat less focused on my job. After all, how exciting it was to have another kid, again, healthy-thank goodness. Then again, how sleepy I was too, after being "woken" up by a crying baby. Anyhow, now that the baby making has left us with kids, whenever the kids (those tween/teens) have an issue we both lose our focus (on work), get stressed out and deal with the issue. I know, our issues are probably nothing. I am not sure how we could get thru a baby with issues, a pregnant teen and yup a nation going on a feeding frenzy. I know our tween/teens could handle a frenzy too. After all, they freak out when we show up in their little circle of their parties etc. At least, they understand that we respect the constitution and given them total freedom of choices in life.

  • Posted By: Roy Jones @ 09/03/2008 2:38:58 PM

    I am a working SINGLE dad. The idea that a mother is someone enabled by birth with "mothering" traits is complete BS. Check the stats, an increasing number of men are raising their children by themselves and many women are forgoing parenting all together. Stop thinking that parenting and the rearing of children only comes from people with vaginas.

  • Posted By: Vicki's View @ 09/03/2008 2:37:39 PM

    This is about choices ??? Sarah Palin???s and John McCain???s.

    First ??? and this relates directly to Ms. Deveny???s article ??? there is the issue of the choices faced by Sarah and Bristol Palin. Being pro-choice, I can understand and, indeed, find laudable Governor Palin???s decision to have her latest child. One has to wonder, however, about Bristol???s ???choice??? to have her baby and to marry someone who might not make the best father and husband. To what degree was that ???choice??? forced on young Bristol by her very ambitious mother? Governor Palin???s decision to plod ahead with a national political campaign ??? a campaign she must have known would shine a bright spotlight of publicity on a daughter in crisis ??? speaks volumes about the Governor???s priorities and, yes Ms. Deveny, her mommy skills.

    The second point relates to Mr. McCain???s choice - forced on him by the ???Base??? that smeared him in 2000. It has been described as a ???bold gamble.??? But, one must ask, a ???bold gamble??? with what? It???s one thing to gamble ??? boldly - with the future of a political campaign; it???s entirely another thing to gamble ??? recklessly ??? with the future of our country. Is it his to gamble with?

    ???Boldly,??? by the way, connotates ???strength.??? But Senator McCain???s caving in to the expediency of winning at any price reeks of weakness ??? the sort of weakness that throws into question the entire narrative of courage being woven around him. Courage, after all, is not just physical.

    Yes, there???s one more choice that needs mentioning ??? ours!


  • Posted By: AguilarJ @ 09/03/2008 2:15:51 PM

    Kathleen Deveny, your article is intriguing but misses the point completely. The problem is not that the Palin's daughter is expecting with child--that is her own business. The problem is that Palin herself advocates the elimination of sexual education for all children, abortions for everyone (even in cases of incest and rape), and all monies for "other" teen pregnancies for all other children. That is the problem, she's a hypocrite. Her and the fundamentalists like her have absolutely no sympathy for others in the same situation, and yet they ask for sympathy when the lights are turned on them and their own sins come to light. There are lots of us Pro-Choices who are completely against abortions???but we understand that abortions will continue, regardless of what the government does. However, it is unacceptable that this woman and others like her want to destroy the very thing that will stop abortions???sex education and access to good contraception. That is not only disgusting but revolting. Do you want me to give you an example of what happens when people like Palin only allow abstinence education (which does not work): Exhibit A, the Palin Family.

    • Posted By: libertyfirst @ 09/03/2008 2:27:12 PM

      What planet are you from? "Abortions for everyone????" Palin is a Right-to-life" anti-abortion proponent. And having an underage daughter be pregnant is the opposite of the word "hyporcrite" -- it means that she supports her children despite the mistakes they may make. And if sex education in schools was such a rousing success, then why all the teen pregnancies for the last 30 years? Sex education is being taught, has been taught and will be taught in schools and for children of nearly all ages...and what has it gotten us? You may be Pro-Choice, and as you said, not all Pro-Choice are for abortions. Fine. But don't confuse Anti-abortionists with "abortions for everyone." That's just plain stupid.

      • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 09/03/2008 2:35:49 PM

        She's a first-class hypocrite. She wants sex education left to parents and yet didn't do the job herself at home.

        By the way, teen pregnancy and abortion went down precipitously under Clinton and went back up again under Bush. The facts are not on the side of those promoting abstinence-only. Study after study has shown it doesn't work. A one-person study by the name of Bristol Palin reinforces it.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 09/03/2008 2:29:35 PM

      Perfect post. It's the hypocrisy stupid!

  • Posted By: Kelcy @ 09/03/2008 2:11:18 PM

    As long as her husband is the primary caregiver in the family and adjusts his work schedule to their needs then I`m indifferent whether she runs for VP or chief dog catcher...I`ve known many couples doing the exact same thing and the men were wonderful in their roles. However, having noted that, Palin was selected for being a female, ultra-conservative republican, campaigning for family values, anti-choice, oil drilling, no earmarking, reduced government in our lives and less spending. Everything she does that reflects on those positions are up for grabs. When the announcement was made last week I went to the Alaska newspaper websites to see what i could find out about her. All the on-going controversies were already there for the viewing, even down to whether her or not Trig is her son or Bristol's. Bristol's I think based on what I could find out. Troopergate was already under investigation by the Alaskan state legislature and her response to that investigation is so much like the Bush administration that it must make them proud. No way will I vote for McCain now. It has nothing to do with her being a working mother and everything to do with what she stands for and how she behaves relative to her belief in "family values."

    • Posted By: fuguewriter @ 09/03/2008 2:35:22 PM

      Very, very well said.

    • Posted By: Johnsonium @ 09/03/2008 2:17:37 PM

      You are spot on. Hypocrisy should always be fare game. This lady is a hypocrite of the highest order. Her sex education policies have real effects on young people not lucky enough to have a governor as a parent.

  • Posted By: dma69 @ 09/03/2008 2:32:22 PM

    So let's see...Gov. Palin is against abortion and birth control, wants abstinence-only programs in schools. Yeah, that worked out REALLY well. Let's face reality: abstinence-only programs DO NOT WORK. Period. I'm not against saving sex for marriage, but we need to realize that teens don't always think rationally and need to know all the options, not just one. Teens need to know EVERYTHING about sex: not just chastity but also about using protection, how the menstral cycle works, the STDs, etc. So that when they do do it, whether it's on their wedding night or not, at least they will know what to do, how their bodies work, and not be left in the dark.

    I had Sex-Ed when I was in high school and I didn't get pregnant (still haven't) and I use protection. A cousin of mine didn't have any sex-ed, and not only was she pregnant at 17, she hid her pregnancy until her eigth month (my aunt and uncle only found out when my cousin looked pale and was taken to the hospital). Has she had sex-ed, I guarantee you this wouldn't have happened. Thank God the baby came out okay, but it was still a shock for everyone.

    This is why Sex-Ed is sorely needed. Not all teens are willing to wait. The least we can do is teach them ALL tha basics, including chastity, and hope that they can make smart choices for themselves in the long run.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse