Why I Do Not Support Sarah Palin
It's not because she has five kids. It's not because she went back to work three days after giving birth to a baby with Down's, which I think is wrong. That's right, I do. Not that mothers shouldn't work, but take a moment, won't you? To stop bleeding, to bond with your baby, to immerse yourself in what you waited all those months for (the mountain, fuck do I need an intervention). And yes, some people don't have the time off from work to take for maternity leave. But I am pretty sure Sarah Palin did.
It's not even because she is anti sex-education. Or because her 17 year-old daughter Bristol is pregnant (we'll put aside the question of whether the Down's baby is really hers or if she truly DID have mono, for now).
No, the reason I'm not a fan of Sarah Palin has more to do with the fact that she doesn't believe in sex education even AFTER having proof in her own home, with her own daughter, that her method does not work. I mean, it does, if you want pregnant teenagers...
It's not even because she is anti sex-education. Or because her 17 year-old daughter Bristol is pregnant (we'll put aside the question of whether the Down's baby is really hers or if she truly DID have mono, for now).
No, the reason I'm not a fan of Sarah Palin has more to do with the fact that she doesn't believe in sex education even AFTER having proof in her own home, with her own daughter, that her method does not work. I mean, it does, if you want pregnant teenagers...
Labels: Asshat, People watching, Shock and Awe
posted by Green at 9/02/2008 11:39:00 AM
11 Comments:
Thanks for putting into words what I've been trying to say all day!
How about trying it on this way:
"The great majority of teenage girls who get pregnant HAVE had sex education - in grammar schools, junior high schools, and high schools. That method doesn't work. I mean, it does, if you want pregnant teenagers..."
What could be sillier than taking one single case and claiming it proves some universal principle?
Ken
Kind of agree with Ken. Don't get me wrong, I am pro sex education, but your argumentation is not convincing in my opinion.
I have another question though: How are the laws for maternity leave in the US? Here in Germany you are on paid leave for six weeks before and eight weeks after birth. And while you are allowed to waive the time before birth, you have to take the eight weeks after birth. It's illegal for your employer to allow you to work in that time.
I went to work again straight after that time because I wanted to, but I agree with you, three days is way too early. Not only because of the bonding aspect but also because pregnancy and birth are rather hard work and you should rest a little. "To stop bleeding"...lol, true!
I tend to agree with Green. It creeps me out to have fanatics running the government.
One thing it seems a lot of people aren't mentioning in the whole teen pregnancy thing is that it isn't the 50s where innocent girls got pregnant because they didn't know how things worked, had no education or no access to birth control. A lot, not all of course, of pregnant teens want to get pregnant and set out to get pregnant. In many places it's "cool" to get pregnant and the girls get attention and think the baby is going to love them when no one else has.
So I think what might work better is a plan to make teenage girls not want to get pregnant. Often by the time they realize how difficult raising a baby is, it's too late and they're stuck with the baby and totally unprepared to deal with it. So we need more than "sex" education. We need "a baby is really hard work and you will suffer and so will the baby if you have one when you're a teenager without a partner, an education or the means to get a good job" education.
In Sarah Palin's daughter's case, I don't know what happened so I can't comment. Maybe her mother sheltered her to the point where she was that innocent or maybe she wanted to get back at her mom. Maybe she just got caught up in the throes of passion and lost her good sense. I don't know so I can't really speculate on this one. It's awfully ironic though.
I have to add my two cents.
My mother told me girls/women (but from now on I will just use young women) got pregnant in the 40s and 50s not because they didn't understand how sex worked (or how babies were made - egg + gazillions of sperm = baby) but because there just wasn't any really good birth control back then besides abstinence – condoms were not what they are today, they did break far more often than they do now. Young women in the 40s & 50s had just as many hormones as they do now, then young women just knew that if they got pregnant, they usually bore the consequences (sorry about the pun). The worst of those consequences was death from illegal abortion and the least of those consequences was shame in their community. Since most people lived in small communities, that was a big deal. Even if they lived in big cities, they would have to leave their neighborhoods if they didn’t want anyone to know. And most people understood, whether from big cities or small rural communities, that if a family member said “Jane went to stay with relatives in Asswipe, Anystate.” meant that Jane was probably pregnant and had to leave.
I’m not saying we should go back to those times where shame or possible death was the best at preventing young women from having sex, but I don’t believe any kind of sex education really works – whether it’s the abstinence only or the full monty sex education. Aids education may have slowed the spread of Aids, but it hasn’t stopped it either. If young people want to have sex, they do. And I also believe abortion as a means of birth control has been shoved down women’s throats and not just by feminists but by men who want no responsibility for the children they produce – not taking responsibility in preventing conception and certainly not providing for the offspring when they arrive. I can understand the myriad reasons why women have abortions but I also believe they are not good for women’s health. In the Palin case, I mostly wonder about Levi Johnston’s father and what he told him about conception and Levi’s moral responsibility towards the young woman (or women) he has had sex with.
Hi, Futurejd: No, the argument is "not convincing."
I took the argument Green used regarding what she called Palin's "method" and applied it to sex education, and the point I tried to make was that it is a silly argument in each case.
If your only argument against sex education is that someone exposed to it got pregnant, then you have no arument against it.
If your only argument against home counseling is that someone exposed to it got pregnant, then you have no argument against it.
I suspect that Green has "other issues" with Palin, and simply suspended the laws of logic in order to take a shot at her.
Ken
Ken, are you trying to convince me of something? Cos you don't need to, I agree with you, as I said above. And I think I understood what you meant in your first comment.
Confused...
I say take Sex Ed out of the classroom and out of the home and BACK into the rear seats of cars where it belongs!
Hi again, Futurejd.
Well, I was addressing your first comment: "but your argumentation is not convincing in my opinion."
I only wanted to say that I didn't *mean* it to be convincing.
I believe I'll stop now, before I confuse myself too.
Ken
Ken, the "you" was meant to be Green! (It's her blog so when I address someone directly it's her, unless I start with your name as in this comment.) I said I aggreed with Ken, because Green's argument was not convincing.
:) I am not confused anymore, how about you?
Futurejd,
You have chased away the shadows and I shall be eternally grateful. Ah ha ha ha ha ha.
Ken
Post a Comment
<< Home