In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Dear Everyone: Please Stop with the Sarah Palin “Pregnancy Hoax” Rumors

Pregnant Sarah Palin
Oh my god she doesn't look pregnant in a photo taken from an odd angle where you can't see her stomach!

This is so mind-blowingly stupid.

An interesting footnote has emerged to a theory that raged around the Internet during Sarah Palin’s candidacy for Vice President. The theory is that Sarah Palin is actually the grandmother of her purported son Trig, not the mother, and that she staged a gigantic hoax during the campaign to cover up this fact.

Professor Bradford Scharlott of Northern Kentucky University has looked into this story in detail and written a long academic article about it. He concludes two things: First, that the “conspiracy theory” is likely true—Sarah Palin staged a huge hoax, and, second, the American media is pathetic for not pursuing the story more aggressively.

Scharlott’s article walks through all the evidence supporting the theory, including the photos of Palin in what is said to have been a late-stage pregnancy, the leisurely 20-hour trip home that Palin took after she supposedly went into labor in Texas, the refusal of the hospital where Trig was supposedly born to even confirm that he was born there (let alone who was the mother), strange statements from Palin’s doctor and the McCain campaign, and so on.

And Scharlott concludes that, given that this hoax would be a massive fraud perpetrated on the entire country by a vice-presidential candidate, the media absolutely should have pursued the story more aggressively.

The biggest hoax in American political history. (We are so bad at hoaxes).

Just because someone flies while they’re at the end of their pregnancy or doesn’t “look pregnant” does not mean that their daughter gave birth and they passed the baby off as theirs (also, a teenage girl giving birth to a baby with Down syndrome is exceedingly rare, so if we’re comparing “evidence I pulled out of my ass,” put that down on “the baby is Sarah’s” side). But “All Palin would have had to do—then and now—to prove that she was Trig’s mother was, ironically, produce a birth certificate,” says Gawker. No. Nope. No. That didn’t work out so well with the Birthers, did it? Let’s not pretend that the people who are convinced that Trig Palin is really Bristol’s are so much more reasonable than the folks who think that Obama was born in Kenya. They are all a bunch of unreasonable people! And unreasonable people, by definition, cannot be reasoned with! So I can’t say I really blame the Palins for stonewalling and refusing to dignify this ridiculous conspiracy theory with “proof.” (Now if only they would behave with dignity about anything else).


104 thoughts on Dear Everyone: Please Stop with the Sarah Palin “Pregnancy Hoax” Rumors

  1. I always hate having to defend Palin–but people always trying to get her family involved like this is fucking ridiculous. And sexist.

  2. Also, wasn’t Bristol’s son — the one we KNOW is her son — born something like ten or eleven months after Trig? I mean, it’s possible, but extremely unlikely that they’re both hers.

  3. Of all the legitimate issues with Palin – and there are sooooo many – the media constantly was harping on the ones (or inventing ones) that simply weren’t really legitimate issues to have with a candidate. Would we have heard so much about clothes if McCain had chosen a male running mate? It’s not like McCain was running around in a suit he bought at Sears.

    I highly doubt that or this or the constant repetition of how hot Palin is (for a mom, y’know) would have come up if not for the fact that she was a she.

  4. I’ve never heard this, but even if it were true, I’d have a hard time caring. It’s not like she stole the baby. And “nuclear family not acting nuclear” is definitely not up there with bigfoot. Seriously, fuck bigfoot.

  5. Pandagon did a post on this ages ago, and it seriously turned into a HUGE debate. I can’t believe it’s still making the rounds.

  6. Seriously, who the fuck cares. If she did the sad thing would be that she felt the need to pull such an elaborate hoax in order to force her family into the “family values” mold. I prefer to hate on her for various other policy reasons.

  7. It looks like the author of this article didn’t read the professor’s paper. I’ve have, and nowhere does it say Bristol is Trig’s mother. What it does do, is lay out compelling evidence that Palin either lied about her pregnancy, or very seriously and knowingly endangered her baby. The paper then questions why the media has never questioned her crazy, irresponsible story.

    This article is a perfect example of what the professor talks about in his paper. Dismissing the story out of hand, with no more reason to believe it isn’t true, than to believe it is true. The professor lays out his evidence….where’s your evidence refuting his claims? You don’t present any. If you want “dear everybody” to stop talking about it, enough to write about it at all, then do your homework first, and don’t be so lazy. People aren’t going to listen to you, just because you “say so” with nothing to back it up.

  8. The hospital refused to confirm that Trig was born there?! That’s a blatant cover-up! Why, if you called the health system I work for requesting patient information, we’d gladly–Oh, wait, we’d say, “I have no information available for a person by that name.”

    Darn HIPAA! Always getting in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

  9. Let’s face it. The whole rumor gained traction because no one could believe any woman would be stupid enough to board a plane from Dallas to Anchorage after experiencing contractions and leaking fluid. But it appears there is actually a woman stupid enough to do that and she somehow still got tapped for the VP nomination. So I can’t decide which action was more stupid – boarding the plane while in labor or choosing such an ignoramus for a high-profile government position.

  10. Isn’t Palin’s new baby barely older than Bristol’s? Does that girl really look like she spent two years being pregnant? I don’t think so.

  11. The paper never says Bristol is Trig’s mother, just that Sarah Palin lied about her pregnancy. And then put the fetus in danger. In a pregnancy that didn’t exist. Um, okay.

    It’s nice to know that the Left is just as frickin’ tinfoil hatty as the right. Make those hats while Rome burns, people. :::rollseyes:::

  12. Even if it was true (of course it isn’t) I fail to see the huge hoax here. What?! A lady tried to prevent slut-shaming of her teenaged daughter and questioning of her own parent skills on a national level? /sarcasm

    Yeah, if I were running for VP and my hypothetical teenaged daughter had just had a baby, I might just do the same thing.

  13. fanya: Dismissing the story out of hand, with no more reason to believe it isn’t true, than to believe it is true.

    THIS. No one believes me about bigfoot, and they’ve never presented me with evidence that it’s not real.

  14. The hospital refused to confirm that Trig was born there?! That’s a blatant cover-up! Why, if you called the health system I work for requesting patient information, we’d gladly–Oh, wait, we’d say, “I have no information available for a person by that name.”

    Darn HIPAA! Always getting in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

    LOL.

    I’m going to paraphrase Triumph, the Comic Insult Dog: “Did Sarah Palin participate in a pregnancy hoax?”… “The correct answer is: WHO GIVES A FUCK?!”

  15. I for one, and really glad that the Left is starting to embrace this. Now maybe some people on our side will start to take David Icke seriously. You can’t prove that the top leaders of the world aren’t shape-shifting lizards, dammit.

  16. Also, it’s ridiculous how some people expect hospitals should just ignore existing laws and share info like that. Anti-choice politicians keep trying to get medical institutions to share info on abortion – so that women who have had abortions can be burned at the stake, presumably. If we legitimize this ridiculous Palin pregnancy debate, we legitimize their actions too.

    If the law applies to everyone – it applies to everyone. Including Sarah Palin.

  17. “Just because someone flies while they’re at the end of their pregnancy or doesn’t “look pregnant” does not mean that their daughter gave birth and they passed the baby off as theirs…”

    Well of course she wouldn’t look pregnant. She deposited the egg case in the Arizona desert, in warm sand where it could incubate, in a place where the mother ship could monitor and protect it. No wait, it was in Area 51.

  18. Bristol had a kid not that long after her mom, though. Something ike 8 months later, maybe a little more. Point is, unless there’s real proof of it, it’s unlikely and I’m going to ignore it.

  19. And I’m sick of all this talk like, “If she did have the baby, that proves she’s a horrible evil bad mother who endangered her baby’s life by waiting to go to the hospital!!” Um, excuse me, are you her gynecologist? Do you have any fucking inside information as to the health of Sarah Palin/her unborn baby so that you can decide whether or not this was a responsible decision? And aren’t liberals the ones who say women should be allowed to make their own healthcare decisions, especially about pregnancy? And shouldn’t be shamed and judged for it? But apparently if you don’t behave in a way Andrew Sullivan finds perfectly rational at all times (because he’s the expert on women’s health, especially Sarah Palin’s) you’re a bad mother. Fuck that shit.

  20. Almost none of you, including the blogger, have bothered to reference the actual evidence presented in the case. There is more to it than ‘she didn’t look pregnant’.

    Of course it’s highly unlikely but the pieces fit – and there is definitely a fishy smell around the subject.

    The individual claiming that this is all ‘sexist’ is a disgrace to feminists, and that kind of attitude will turn all men and level-headed women against you.

  21. Hey fellow feminists:

    Sarah Palin has based much of her political identity on her “mama grizzly” image, and she’s made some unbelievable claims about the circumstances regarding the birth of her son. There is nothing untoward about looking for evidence of the claims she’s made, any more than it would be to ask a male politician about his war record, if he were using it for political benefit.

    I concur that Sarah Palin is an unprecedented figure in American politics, and the lines between public and private are very confusing when it comes to her. But let me ask you this: Do you remember, back in the 2000 election, Al Gore’s story about his son’s car accident – how he sat at the hospital bedside and looked into his child’s lifeless eyes and everything changed that day? Gore told that story at the DNC and many, many times in front of a national audience – as a sympathy generator, as a metaphor for the direction the United States was headed, as a reason to vote for him.

    If that fundamental, life-altering story turned out to be a fabrication, his career would be over, as it should be. The same is true for Sarah Palin, who has placed her child with Down Syndrome at the core of her political identity. She may run for president again, but even if she doesn’t she continues to have a significant impact on the national discourse. I believe she has gotten a pass that no other modern political figure has received, and I feel that’s wrong.

    She drags her family into the spotlight again and again, and she’s got feminists defending her. You are being played by a master.

  22. On a personal level, I dislike it when someone with a wanted pregnancy engages in actions that might result in fetal harm/distress (like smoking, drinking, doing drugs, and ignoring valuable medical advice, and flying late trimester).

    But since I am not pregnant, I DON’T CARE.

  23. “She drags her family into the spotlight again and again, and she’s got feminists defending her.”

    Male politicians, of course, never use their families to gain sympathy/votes. Never bring them into the spotlight. Never talk about being “family men.” Nope. Never. And it’s clearly impossible to hate Sarah Palin’s politics and still think her pregnancy is none of the country’s business. All good feminists should clearly be sniffing around in this woman’s private hospital records, dragging her reproductive decisions out into the light to be judged and shamed. And the fact that no reputable media has reported on this doesn’t prove that there’s no story, just that it’s a conspiracy OMG!!! Because the media loves Sarah Palin so much and would gladly sit quietly on such a juicy story to protect her good name from scandal, just like they kept Bristol’s pregnancy quiet since it was her own business…oh wait.

  24. Like I said, she’s playing you. She’s no different than Rod Blagojevich or Bernie Madoff, but because she’s a woman, it’s just wrong to hold her accountable.

    And who’s sexist?

  25. So we’re comparing not showing the world your bloody hospital sheets to committing crimes?

    Look, I hate Sarah Palin’s politics, and I think she’s a moron. But is it too damn much to ask that we not stick our nose in her panties? Is her pregnancy really anyone’s business?

  26. Are all female politicians now going to be required to prove their children are really theirs? I’m sure you could come up with some half-baked “suspicious” shit about quite a few of them. Ooh, she was 45 when she got pregnant, maybe it was secretly her daughter’s baby! To the hospital! Let’s strike a blow for feminism, and steal her birth records to print in the tabloids!

    If anybody had any actual proof that Bristol was the mother, by the way, you know damn well it would be on the front page of a reputable newspaper, not a rumor spread by some obscure professor making the rounds on the Internet. If his article was so shockingly persuasive, don’t you think he could find someplace with a slightly bigger circulation and higher reputation to publish it?

  27. Dear James: thank you for the mansplaining. Please take some pamphlets as you exit.

    Dear Rationalist: please change your name to something a little more accurate. Also, you may want to consider wearing your tinfoil hat at a more rakish angle. It would be quite dashing.

    You two mini-Neros can keep fiddling while Rome burns.

  28. And let me also add – to those who are asking “why does it matter?” – I’ll tell you why it matters to me. Here is a woman who has told dozens of times an absolutely ridiculous story about labor and birth – a story that has repeatedly changed and evolved – and the general consensus is that it’s cool because it makes her “tough.”

    As a feminist, I am appalled that such a fabrication is allowed to stand. I want the public to be aware of the realities of pregnancy, childbirth and the care of infants with special needs, not to buy into the elaborate fantasy of a fame-driven, power-hungry crazy woman. It’s time to end this nonsense.

  29. I do not care whose baby it is. Don’t we realize this just makes Sarah Palin look like a victim once again and puts her on the defensive? Can’t we go back to February and ignore her? And ignore Trump and Bachman while we’re at it? Because I’m pretty sure Romney is in his underground lair laughing to himself right now and preparing his Republican nominee victory speech.

    This does not compare to the Birther issue. I think the Birthers are incredibly wrong and infuriating, but if they were correct, that would mean that Obama was not eligible to be the president per the U.S. Constitution. Whereas if Palin didn’t give birth to Trig that would mean . . . she didn’t give birth to Trig and is a liar. I am just as sick as everyone about the media’s handling of, well, EVERYTHING, but obviously the Birther story was far more engaging to the public than the Trig story.

  30. anna – absolutely not. But no female politician – Clinton, Ferraro, Pelosi, Dole – has made her motherhood the center of her political identity the way Palin has. Like I said, she uses it the way male politicians use their military service.

    She put her kids in the spotlight. She dragged poor Trig in his diapers out into the cold in front of screaming crowds night after night on her bus tour, and then handed him off to staffers and signed books for hours. She kept Piper out of school for weeks to travel with her and trotted her out onstage again and again. She offered Bristol to the public as a pregnant teen in 2008 in order to refute speculation that Trig wasn’t her own child. She’s the one who’s done all this.

    Yes, politicians use their kids as credibility for family values. But compare Palin to Clinton, for example. Hillary fought zealously to provide Chelsea with the opportunity to have as normal a childhood as possible, demanding reporters leave her alone.

    We should not be defending Palin. These questions matter.

  31. This wasn’t her first labor. It was her fifth. I’m willing to give her credit for remembering how her own body had done labor and delivery in the past and using that experimental evidence as a basis for action. It blows my mind that so many people assume that unless a Medicine Man laid hands on her, any decision she made was necessarily irresponsible.

    And if, in defiance of Occam’s Razor and sense, Trig really is Bristol’s baby, then the Palin family was acting in perfect conformity to Traditional Family Values. Of a particular tradition, at least.

    I seriously don’t understand why people expect me to get all het up about this crap.

  32. “As a feminist, I am appalled that such a fabrication is allowed to stand. I want the public to be aware of the realities of pregnancy, childbirth and the care of infants with special needs, not to buy into the elaborate fantasy of a fame-driven, power-hungry crazy woman. It’s time to end this nonsense.”

    One of the basic feminist beliefs is respecting other womens bodies even if I dislike her beliefs or dislike her as a person. The fact that she may have lied or exaggerated doesn’t give anyone the right to poke around her private medical records for their personal satisfaction.

    This may come as a shock to you, but women are part of the general public and many of them have experienced pregnancy and labor or caring for special needs children. I highly doubt they’re not aware of the realities. LMAO!

  33. Anne – Palin attempts to impact policy – weighing in on the budget debate vis a vis funding for Planned Parenthood, etc. That affects MY body. And her popularity is fundamentally tied to her pro-life identity, which is based on a pregnancy that there is extensive evidence did not happen. It matters.

    Is it important that the public know that John Edwards fathered a child with another woman while presenting himself as an affable family man? Does it matter that he used donors’ funds to pay off that woman?

    I say it does. It tells us he is not worthy of national office. And in this case, the fact the Palin carries her Down Syndrome baby as a prop – when in fact she very likely did not give birth to him – reveals her as a fraud whose tweets and facebook posts should not be part of our national conversation.

  34. I do have to second anna and iiii on this furor about Palin’s decision to fly–she gets to do that. Maybe it’s a choice a lot of other people wouldn’t have made, but it was her body and her call. I’m all in favor of everyone keeping their noses out of everyone else’s panties, whether they’re lacy thongs or enormous granny panties with maternity support bands. She has so many other detestable qualities–it’s not like we’re going to run out material.

  35. And one more thing – as a previous comment seems to be hung up in moderation – about whether we ought to be asking female politicians for their hospital records:

    Absolutely not. But no female politician – Clinton, Ferraro, Pelosi, Dole – has made her motherhood the center of her political identity the way Palin has. Like I said, she uses it the way male politicians use their military service.

    SHE put her kids in the spotlight. She dragged poor Trig in his diapers out into the cold in front of screaming crowds night after night on her bus tour, and then handed him off to staffers and signed books for hours. She kept Piper out of school for weeks to travel with her and trotted her out onstage again and again. She offered Bristol to the public as a pregnant teen in 2008 in order to refute speculation that Trig wasn’t her own child. She’s the one who’s done all this.

    Yes, politicians use their kids as credibility for family values. But compare Palin to Clinton, for example. Hillary fought zealously to provide Chelsea with the opportunity to have as normal a childhood as possible, demanding reporters leave her alone.

    She is using her kids in an unprecedented way, and then hiding behind “feminism” and “privacy” when anyone asks her about them. It’s ingenious, but we should not be going along with it. If she wants privacy, I suggest she not put her kids on a reality show.

  36. I’m sorry if I’m dominating the conversation here. It just frustrates me to no end. Palin did show the world her “bloody hospital sheets” in her book, Going Rogue. She went into extensive detail about the alleged pregnancy and labor.

    But if I ask her “Um…some of what you said doesn’t really make sense,” then I’m being sexist?

    Come on.

  37. I don’t care about it politically, but I think it’s a fascinating story and I want to find out the truth, goddamit.

    *The truth is out there.*

  38. Look, Palin says a lot of things that don’t really make sense. Like, you can see some parts of Russia from some parts of Alaska, which somehow means… whatever the hell it means.

  39. <iShe put her kids in the spotlight. She dragged poor Trig in his diapers out into the cold in front of screaming crowds night after night on her bus tour, and then handed him off to staffers and signed books for hours. She kept Piper out of school for weeks to travel with her and trotted her out onstage again and again. She offered Bristol to the public as a pregnant teen in 2008 in order to refute speculation that Trig wasn’t her own child. She’s the one who’s done all this.

    Let me get this straight: we should believe some fucked up tinfoil hat conspiracy theory because Sarah Palin traded on her motherhood to get political credibility and besides, she’s a bad working mother who puts her kids in the spotlight? And that by exposing her as a liar, or at least as a bad mother, we are protecting reproductive rights everywhere?

    What?

    I had no idea that it was feminist to indulge in drive-by parenting.

    As far as comparing her to John Edwards–we already held her to the same standard. He got roasted for misusing campaign funds (baby mama) and she got roasted for misusing funds (clothing shopping sprees).

  40. Ugh, quote fail.

    She put her kids in the spotlight. She dragged poor Trig in his diapers out into the cold in front of screaming crowds night after night on her bus tour, and then handed him off to staffers and signed books for hours. She kept Piper out of school for weeks to travel with her and trotted her out onstage again and again. She offered Bristol to the public as a pregnant teen in 2008 in order to refute speculation that Trig wasn’t her own child. She’s the one who’s done all this.

    Let me get this straight: we should believe some fucked up tinfoil hat conspiracy theory because Sarah Palin traded on her motherhood to get political credibility and besides, she’s a bad working mother who puts her kids in the spotlight? And that by exposing her as a liar, or at least as a bad mother, we are protecting reproductive rights everywhere?

    BTW, she didn’t offer Bristol up as an alibi–FFS, Bristol was pregnant. If she didn’t say anything, people’s tongues would be wagging over the cover up.

    And not for nothing, but male politicians trot their children out on the campaign trail all the time, but we don’t have the parenting pitchfork mafia at the ready to skewer them for being bad parents worthy of investigation. FFS.

    I had no idea that it was feminist to indulge in drive-by parenting.

    As far as comparing her to John Edwards–we already held her to the same standard. He got roasted for misusing campaign funds (baby mama) and she got roasted for misusing funds (clothing shopping sprees).

  41. If she were just a reality star, none of this would matter. But she was a vice presidential candidate, and she may run again, so her truthfulness is a valid subject.

  42. But she was a vice presidential candidate, and she may run again, so her truthfulness is a valid subject.

    You can oppose her VP or Presidential run based on her record as Governor and her positions (not to mention her monumental media fuckups). Engaging in conspiracy theories and bad-mommy shaming is something I expect from the likes of Glenn Beck, not a supposed progressive.

  43. Oh, for crying out loud. “Bad mommy shaming?” So no politician should be judged on the way they treat their children? Or is it just female politicians who are too fragile to withstand scrutiny?

    Okay, Sheelzebub, how about this. One of these things must be true:

    When Sarah Palin was governor of Alaska, she perpetrated a hoax on the citizens of her state and, more to the point, knowingly placed her medical doctor in legal jeopardy by publicly claiming that doctor encouraged her to engage in malpractice-worthy behavior – i.e. flying while in labor and leaking amniotic fluid.

    Or, setting aside the risk to her own child: while traveling in her official capacity as Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin knowingly put two airplanes full of people at very high risk of an emergency landing.

    In either case, yes, I am judging her on her record.

  44. doo. dooo. doo. do. do. do. *X-files theme*

    Also, she’s given birth numerous times regardless and is raising a child with a disability…so I’ll give her that she tough. She is a tough woman who has faced many challenges in life. None of that is particularly problematic to admit even when you think she’s a freaking disaster, is dead wrong on almost everything, and would be a horrifying choice for any political office.

  45. “So I can’t say I really blame the Palins for stonewalling and refusing to dignify this ridiculous conspiracy theory with ‘proof.’ ”

    Yet it’s perfectly all right for Mrs. Palin to slyly suggest that she, the voice of reason, believes President Obama was born in Hawaii but that she finds it “perplexing” that he’s spent $2 million to hide his birth certificate (a blatant lie). And she “appreciates” Trump’s efforts to get to the bottom of this conspiracy theory, since the president must be hiding something else on the certificate (dog whistle: He’s a Muslim!).

    So what is that insulates Mrs. Palin from similar terrible intrusions into her private life? (Especially since she said on national TV that she would release Trig’s birth certificate, yet never did.) Her uterus, I guess, judging from some responses here.

    But it’s fine for her to politically insert herself into attempts to deny Planned Parenthood’s services for other women. Or to continue making a ton of money charging people to hear the story of Trig’s miraculous birth and how great she was for CHOOSING not to abort him. Or to derail a reasonable discussion about health care by wielding the inflammatory phrase “death panels” in conjunction with her child’s special needs.

    As an Alaskan, I know exactly how fraudulent and fragile her self-created mythos is. She uses motherhood like Kevlar to protect herself from legitimate inquiries into her actions, her policies, her judgment, and her character.

    And why not? It’s done a fabulous job so far. Keep up the good work–no doubt she’ll send you a thank-you note.

    1. Yet it’s perfectly all right for Mrs. Palin to slyly suggest that she, the voice of reason, believes President Obama was born in Hawaii but that she finds it “perplexing” that he’s spent $2 million to hide his birth certificate (a blatant lie). And she “appreciates” Trump’s efforts to get to the bottom of this conspiracy theory, since the president must be hiding something else on the certificate (dog whistle: He’s a Muslim!).

      Um, where did I say that’s “perfectly all right”? I think I made it clear that the Birthers are abhorrent and ridiculous. I also can’t stand Sarah Palin. I think she’s horrible (hence the last line of the post). But just because someone is horrible doesn’t mean that anything and everything related to them is fair game.

  46. Jill – anything and everything isn’t fair game. What’s game with Palin are the qualities she’s blatantly using for political gain. She doesn’t get to have it both ways. She doesn’t get to tout her motherhood as making her particularly qualified as a politician (a mama grizzly “just kinda knows when something’s wrong”), but then claiming that questions about her motherhood are off limits.

    Contrast that with Hillary, whose motherhood is a vital part of her life, but her long political record is what she expects to be judged by in the public sphere.

  47. Palin’s blatant racism doesn’t mean its perfectly acceptable to invade her privacy and question her reproductive choices. Either you believe in choice as an inviolate principle or you don’t. In that sense yeah, she can hide behind her uterus with respect to her reproductive choices. Meanwhile we continue to attack her on her racist and generally evil bullshit rather than relying on the tired old shit that is slung at some point at every female politician.

  48. Having been part of that old conversation on Pandagon that RedSonja mentions, I have to start off with disclaimers: (1) I oppose both (a) Sarah Palin as a politician AND (b) misogynous attacks on Palin. (2) It’s none of my business (a) how she comported herself during her pregnancies, nor (b) how she rears her children. (3) I’m not a fan of Andrew Sullivan and feel a bit creeped out by his obsession with Palin and the pregnancy.

    But Scharlott’s article is rational, not at all tinfoil hatty, and the pregnancy story Palin told is very dubious. Just one point that hasn’t already been mentioned: Dr. Cathy Baldwin-Johnson (the physician who would not confirm Palin’s statement that she delivered Trig) is a family doctor. Is it really likely that a well-off woman who knew she was pregnant with a baby who had Down syndrome would go out of her way to be attended in childbirth by a provider who doesn’t specialize in obstetrics?

    As for HIPAA, mentioned upthread, there would be no violation whatsoever in a doctor’s confirming, on instructions from the patient, that she witnessed the birth of a baby.

    On Bristol’s giving birth soon after, Scharlott notes that we don’t know when Trig was born (Palin said April 18, but who knows; the Mat-Su hospital won’t say anything) nor how far along Bristol was in her pregnancy during the Republican convention.

    Okay, here come the brickbats. But, like, come on: Why exactly do we have to put our trust in Sarah Palin when she tells an improbable story?

  49. Why exactly do we have to keep talking about this? I feel like I squeezed all the prurient interest I could out of this story back in 2008. It’s not longer shocking or even amusing. It’s just eye-roll inducing.

    You want to discredit Palin, fact-check her latest speech.

  50. And in this case, the fact the Palin carries her Down Syndrome baby as a prop – when in fact she very likely did not give birth to him – reveals her as a fraud whose tweets and facebook posts should not be part of our national conversation.

    Yes, if you’re going to use a baby as a political prop you’d damn well better have pushed it out your own vagina, amiright? Because borrowing a prop-baby is truly the crime here. :p

    But honestly, why are we stiiiiiill trying to get literally up in Sarah Palin’s business? I don’t care how many babies she’s had! I don’t care how many babies Bristol’s had. I don’t care if Bristol is her own great-grandma through some bizarre time-traveling scenario, or if Sarah is able to store fertilized eggs for later incubation like an arctic seal (no, wait, I do care about that; that would be totally awesome. :D)

    If all the rumors were true it would be personally distasteful, but not influence my already very, very poor opinion of her as a politician. And yeah, it’s sexist to suddenly become oh-so-concerned Maury-style about female politicians’ exact genital history when we don’t scrutinize men similarly.

  51. Rationalist: Hey fellow feminists:Sarah Palin has based much of her political identity on her “mama grizzly” image, and she’s made some unbelievable claims about the circumstances regarding the birth of her son. There is nothing untoward about looking for evidence of the claims she’s made, any more than it would be to ask a male politician about his war record, if he were using it for political benefit.I concur that Sarah Palin is an unprecedented figure in American politics, and the lines between public and private are very confusing when it comes to her. But let me ask you this: Do you remember, back in the 2000 election, Al Gore’s story about his son’s car accident – how he sat at the hospital bedside and looked into his child’s lifeless eyes and everything changed that day? Gore told that story at the DNC and many, many times in front of a national audience – as a sympathy generator, as a metaphor for the direction the United States was headed, as a reason to vote for him. If that fundamental, life-altering story turned out to be a fabrication, his career would be over, as it should be. The same is true for Sarah Palin, who has placed her child with Down Syndrome at the core of her political identity. She may run for president again, but even if she doesn’t she continues to have a significant impact on the national discourse. I believe she has gotten a pass that no other modern political figure has received, and I feel that’s wrong. She drags her family into the spotlight again and again, and she’s got feminists defending her. You are being played by a master.

    B-I-N-G-O!

    I defended her when they focused on her looks, when people blatantly questioned the ability of a mom to be VP, but I am NOT going to defend her “right” to shame people for taking control of their own bodies while she claims to have put a fetus in danger in the last trimester. Because according to her own fucking values what she did was dead ass wrong but its somehow ok because she’s Sarah Palin and other people were picking on her about it so its the job of feminists to defend her jackassedness. Not this feminist, nope.

  52. Bagelsan: I don’t care if Bristol is her own great-grandma through some bizarre time-traveling scenario,

    I just watched the Futurama where Fry did this. I don’t know if you were trying to reference it, but you made my night.

  53. As a feminist, I am appalled that such a fabrication is allowed to stand. I want the public to be aware of the realities of pregnancy, childbirth and the care of infants with special needs, not to buy into the elaborate fantasy of a fame-driven, power-hungry crazy woman. It’s time to end this nonsense.

    If you’re using a gendered ‘unfit mother’ attack against Sarah Palin, you are not a feminist.

    I defended her when they focused on her looks, when people blatantly questioned the ability of a mom to be VP, but I am NOT going to defend her “right” to shame people for taking control of their own bodies while she claims to have put a fetus in danger in the last trimester. Because according to her own fucking values what she did was dead ass wrong but its somehow ok because she’s Sarah Palin and other people were picking on her about it so its the job of feminists to defend her jackassedness. Not this feminist, nope.

    If you’re claiming the right to publicly shame Sarah Palin for her reproductive choices, you are not a feminist.

    It really is just that simple. If being a feminist means anything at all, it has to mean not attacking women based on gendered, patriarchal constructs. And yes, the idea that you have the right to know all the details about a woman’s pregnancy, that you get to judge whether or not she was sufficiently concerned about her child, that you get to shame her for not being a good enough mother, is part and parcel of the patriarchal claim that women’s sexuality is public property.

    If Sarah Palin had had an abortion and now denies it, would it be a lie? Of course. Would it be acceptable for feminists to shame her for having had an abortion? NO. “Her body, her choice” isn’t an empty slogan to be discarded when convenient.

  54. Would it be acceptable for feminists to shame her for having had an abortion? NO.

    It would, however, be acceptable for feminists to shame her for being a fucking hypocrite. You don’t get to try to use your power as a politician to deny rights to other people while secretly taking those rights for yourself. I wouldn’t care, personally, if Sarah Palin had ten abortions, but I would care that she had ten abortions and then tried to present herself as the pro-life poster woman and deny other women the right to abortions. Ditto the gay Republican politicians who try to deny other gay people rights, ditto drug-taking Republicans who try to demonize and strip rights from other drug-takers, ditto seniors on Medicare campaigning against the expansion of Medicare to younger people. It’s the hypocrisy.

    That being said, NO ONE is arguing that Palin had an abortion… just that she either wasn’t really pregnant, in which case, who fucking cares? Palin has never tried to make it illegal for women to pretend that their daughter’s baby is their own. Or, they are arguing that Palin endangered her fetus, which, again, who cares? Palin has also never tried to make it illegal for pregnant women to do moderately dangerous things while pregnant. Sure, politically she fits right in with a gang of people who would probably love to be able to arrest women for smoking while pregnant, or refusing their doctor’s desire to give them a c-section, but the “you’re endangering your baby!” asshattery is not actually limited to the pro-life crowd. Plenty of people will make the argument that if you wanted to abort the kid, you have the right to do that, but if you don’t choose to abort the kid then you should not have the right to drink, smoke or refuse your prenatal vitamins.

    Here’s my thing about this: I don’t care. I don’t care if Sarah Palin wasn’t pregnant. It doesn’t *matter*. The woman is a moron who is pretty much wrong about everything, but what difference does it make if she was pregnant or not? She endangered her fetus by flying? Yeah, and this is inconsistent with her being an idiot how? She faked her pregnancy to protect her daughter from public shame (and herself from being shamed for being the mother of a slutty slutmcpants)? Aside from the unlikelihood given that now we know Bristol must have *actually* gotten pregnant within weeks of Trig’s birth if not before his birth, even assuming it was true, it would be inconsistent with her values how? “Mama grizzly” advertises herself as someone who’d take a bullet for her kids; lying to protect them is inconsistent with Sarah Palin’s self-presentation as a loyal mother in what way?

    Rationalist, who isn’t very, keeps bringing up that Palin uses her kids as props and makes a big thing of her motherhood. Well, fuck, is anyone arguing that she was *never* pregnant and that *none* of her kids are hers? Or that she just rents those kids and actually a completely different woman is raising them as their mother? No? Then STFU. She makes a big thing of her motherhood and she is, demonstrably, a mother. Having four biological kids instead of five does not make her less a mother. *Raising* a boy with Down’s Syndrome is as impressive as choosing to give birth to one. So she is still a mother of a Down’s Syndrome child whether she actually gave birth to him or not, so who the fuck cares who his biological mother is? It’s probably Palin, but if it’s not, so what? She lied to protect her kid? When male politicians lie, it’s usually to protect themselves frm their wives divorcing their cheating asses.

    Palin lying to protect her child is entirely in line with her expressed values as a mother and as a politician. Palin being “tough” to the point of probable stupidity and endangering her fetus because she knows best is entirely in line with her self-presentation as well. Palin doesn’t need your “medical smarts” and your “best practices”; she’s a maverick, remember? She’s goin’ rogue. She’s a normal, regular kind of mom and she knows what’s best for her kids, doncha know? No smartypants doctor with her “college degree” is going to tell Sarah Palin what to do.

    So, you know, the thing I hate most about this stupid, stupid meme is that it puts me in the position of having to defend Sarah Palin, who most certainly would not do the same for me and who I despise and consider an idiot and in many ways actively evil. But I just can’t let stupidity like this go. You liberal guys are letting down the side! You’re making liberals look as bad as the Birthers! Worse, since as asinine as the Birthers’ theories are, at least if their theory was true it would *matter*! It doesn’t say anywhere in the Constitution that you can’t be President if you didn’t give birth to your own kids. This obsession with whether Palin gave birth to Trig or not is stupid, it is wrong, it wouldn’t make a goddamn bit of difference if it were true, and it actually makes Palin look good because if all people can find to criticize her on is a wacky conspiracy theory about her baby, she must be golden!

  55. <iWhen Sarah Palin was governor of Alaska, she perpetrated a hoax on the citizens of her state and, more to the point, knowingly placed her medical doctor in legal jeopardy by publicly claiming that doctor encouraged her to engage in malpractice-worthy behavior – i.e. flying while in labor and leaking amniotic fluid.

    Or, setting aside the risk to her own child: while traveling in her official capacity as Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin knowingly put two airplanes full of people at very high risk of an emergency landing.

    You could say that about any male politician who’s had heart troubles or other health issues and hasn’t been that upfront about it. Yet the shaming is reserved for Palin and her supposed bad-mommy antics.

    FFS. This obsession with her parenting and some tinfoil-hat conspiracy theory is really fucking creepy. There’s plenty of ammo to be used against Palin that’s completely legit and won’t generate sympathy for her in a backlash against Glenn Beckish tactics–as iiii said, you can just fact-check her latest speech.

  56. So, you know, the thing I hate most about this stupid, stupid meme is that it puts me in the position of having to defend Sarah Palin, who most certainly would not do the same for me and who I despise and consider an idiot and in many ways actively evil. But I just can’t let stupidity like this go. You liberal guys are letting down the side! You’re making liberals look as bad as the Birthers! Worse, since as asinine as the Birthers’ theories are, at least if their theory was true it would *matter*! It doesn’t say anywhere in the Constitution that you can’t be President if you didn’t give birth to your own kids. This obsession with whether Palin gave birth to Trig or not is stupid, it is wrong, it wouldn’t make a goddamn bit of difference if it were true, and it actually makes Palin look good because if all people can find to criticize her on is a wacky conspiracy theory about her baby, she must be golden!

    THIS. Jesus, people. It’s like the Left has taken dumbfuck pills since 2008 or something. Cut that shit out.

  57. Bitter: I think Andrew Sullivan is the sole occupant of the leaky boat. As his recent fawning over the courage of Paul Ryan’s “extract vital nutrients from the elderly” Medicare plan indicates, he’s about as left as Father Coughlin (incidentally, he has ANOTHER post up on the non-subject today).

    Oh, I’m sorry, there’s some professor at Northern Kentucky University. Perhaps he’s the Left, since Ward Churchill absconded with the tip jar to Cuba.

  58. I think people just get the names of the babies confused–Tripp & Trig. Right now, I can’t even remember which is which. Some folks probably just assume they’re the same baby. I’m just saying.

  59. Alara, you raise really good points, and I’ve spent some time thinking about what you’ve said, about why any of this matters.

    But first, Sheelzebub: “You could say that about any male politician who’s had heart troubles or other health issues and hasn’t been that upfront about it.”

    No, I could say that about any male politician with heart conditions who claims to have gotten his doctor’s approval to board an airplane full of people while suffering chest pain.

    And mad the swine:

    “If being a feminist means anything at all, it has to mean not attacking women based on gendered, patriarchal constructs.”

    For crying out loud. Palin is the one playing the patriarchal constructs to her favor and you are falling right in line. Mama grizzlies “just know” when something’s wrong because women are so naturally intuitive? Yes, I have the right to ask questions of a politician who touts her experience carrying a child with Down Syndrome as making her worthy of my vote, when there are legitimate questions about whether she was actually pregnant with that child, just the same as if a male candidate tells me that his military service makes him heroic and I should vote for him for that reason.

    It’s exactly the same, because Palin has made it the same. No other female politician on the national stage – that I’m aware of – has ever made maternity such a fundamental part of her identity and appeal.

    If Sarah Palin had covered for her daughter and kept it quiet this would be no one’s business. I’m confident there are politicians in whose family this has occurred. But she has made this part of her campaign narrative time and time again. SHE has. So why don’t you get angry at her for that? Why is she allowed to use this ridiculous anti-feminist birth story to her advantage but voters are not allowed to ask questions about its veracity?

    Look, I understand why – because this is about parenting and Palin is a woman – it appears I’m attacking her for being a bad mom. I find her parenting disgusting, but that’s not the point. It’s whether an elected official who asked for my vote for the vice presidency has lied about something that THEY have made fundamental to their identity again and again for financial and political gain.

  60. Oh for the love of the Flying Fucking Spaghetti Monster.

    Look, that “narrative” would have been just as successful whether she birthed Trig or Bristol did–because her point was that Trig wasn’t aborted and pro-choice people are big baby-killing meanie butts. That’s what I get pissed off at her for, not her private business.

    And really, “Rationalist,” you’re quite the goal post shifter. First she’s lying about the maternity of Trig. Then she’s a careless mother for getting on a plane so late in her pregnancy (but if she’s not Trig’s biological mother, then there’s no need to freak out about this). Then she’s a bad mother who made mothering part of her narrative (let’s forget about family values d00ds in office who drag their kids out and treat their families like shit–that’s their private lives, after all. But a bitch who we don’t like, well, go after her amirite).

    If we’re going to start lecturing people on what we “should” be angry about, allow me to treat you to another perspective: We’ve got actual douchebags in office, doing everything they can to destroy reproductive rights, LGBT rights, civil rights, and human rights. Getting to the bottom of Who Trig’s Real Mother Is and Sarah Palin: Should She Have Gotten On That Plane When She Was Pregnant (With Her Fake Pregnancy Since We All Know It’s Actually Bristol’s Baby Because I Totally Read About This in the Weekly World News) is not really any sort of strategy.

    FFS. If I didn’t already see such monumental stupid on display in what passes for the Left these days, I’d wonder if you were some sort of neocon troll trying to make our side look ridiculous.

  61. Okay, I give up. Line up with the rest of the feminists defending Palin. Support the right of female politicians to claim womanhood as a special Wonder Woman power, but hide behind it when questions become inconvenient.

    No need for me to expend further effort making your side look ridiculous.

  62. Oh, FFS. Yes, pointing out the inconsistencies in your ‘argument’ (if she lied about her pregnancy with Trig then she wouldn’t have been able to board a fucking airplane late in her pregnancy), pointing out that there are actual ways to fight the conservative machine but the tabloid consipiracy bullshit is not one of them is exactly the same as supporting the right of female politicians to claim special woman power.

    Logic. You need it.

  63. Okay, let me rephrase. I will give up, once I’ve answered your question about my logic.

    I’m saying one of two things is true.

    1. She lied about being pregnant with Trig – not just at the time, but again and again in excruciating detail at in her best-selling book, at fundraisers and campaign stops, for political gain.

    2. She knowingly boarded two planes while leaking amniotic fluid and put the passengers in danger and her doctor in legal jeopardy.

    Either version makes her unqualified for public office, in my view. Apparently not yours, and that’s your prerogative.

    But in any event, because Sarah Palin has made her “pregnancy” with Trig a campaign issue, and there are some very strange inconsistencies in her story, the public has a right to know which one is true. No journalist has bothered to follow up at the time or since, and she’s a potential presidential candidate.

    When Gary Hart was having an affair, it could be argued it was really none of the public’s business (except that politicians expose themselves to questions of character beyond what average citizens should expect). But when he challenged reporters, “follow me around, I don’t care,” he made his sex life a valid subject to investigate.

    You are missing my main point here. She made her pregnancy an issue. The parenthood of Trig, the behavior of Palin during her pregnancy, all that – in normal circumstances – should not be our business (except that Americans generally believe they can expect better behavior of our elected officials). It’s valid for discussion because it’s a discussion SHE initiated and from which she has benefited greatly.

    Do you see?

    There may be better ways to fight the conservative machine. There’s lots to criticize her for. Believe me, this discussion reinforces the challenges of bringing this story to light. But I don’t agree that because it’s awkward, because it raises uncomfortable questions, that it should be ignored.

    1. 1. She lied about being pregnant with Trig – not just at the time, but again and again in excruciating detail at in her best-selling book, at fundraisers and campaign stops, for political gain.

      2. She knowingly boarded two planes while leaking amniotic fluid and put the passengers in danger and her doctor in legal jeopardy.

      Either version makes her unqualified for public office, in my view. Apparently not yours, and that’s your prerogative.

      She’s unqualified for public office because she boarded an airplane while maybe leaking amniotic fluid? That is… wow.

  64. “But I don’t agree that because it’s awkward, because it raises uncomfortable questions, that it should be ignored.”

    How about this–because the only people who will give a shit are partisan Democrats, it’s not really worth our time or trouble? And if she lied about her pregnancy OR if she boarded a plane while late term pregnant, it doesn’t really matter. She didn’t claim special woman power, she was claiming family values–something that the Right will buy no matter what. If she lied about being pregnant to protect her daughter, it will be seen as heroic in the eyes of the Right. If she boarded a plane at risk to her pregnancy, she’ll be seen as a spitfire who wouldn’t let anything get in the way of doing her job.

    If we engage in shaming rhetoric, then we’re no better than the Right wing. We can certainly call her out on her hypocrisy just by pointing out the fact her policies fuck things up for other mothers, other parents, and children. We can point out that yes, it’s great that a woman–and a mother–is running for VP and that the sexist attacks aren’t cool. And BTW, Ms. Palin, what do you propose to do about the fact that many women who work and raise their families are shamed by the folks on your side?

    But going off on a “huge” fraud, which would boil down to (if true, which I don’t believe it is): she lied to protect her daughter Bristol or she overestimated her ability to travel while carrying a late term fetus isn’t low-hanging fruit. Her stunning lack of knowledge about the world, about policy, about economics, and her abdication of the governorship before the end of her first term are all far better, more convincing, and more effective arguments against her.

    This ain’t Watergate. It’s frankly ridiculous that it’s being treated as such.

  65. Jill – not “maybe” leaking. Knowingly in labor, during a high risk pregnancy. In other words, LIKELY to require emergency intervention while in flight. You think that’s just fine? I think it’s equivalent to drinking and driving.

    Sheelzebub – I do understand what you are saying about the other arguments against her. And since you don’t believe this story, please do pursue those.

  66. Rationalist: Jill – not “maybe” leaking. Knowingly in labor, during a high risk pregnancy. In other words, LIKELY to require emergency intervention while in flight. You think that’s just fine? I think it’s equivalent to drinking and driving.

    You really think that? You realize that she wasn’t the pilot of that flight, right? My mom got into a taxi while “leaking amniotic fluid” when she was about to have me, so I really resent your “comparison”.

  67. I’m saying one of two things is true.

    1. She lied about being pregnant with Trig – not just at the time, but again and again in excruciating detail at in her best-selling book, at fundraisers and campaign stops, for political gain.

    2. She knowingly boarded two planes while leaking amniotic fluid and put the passengers in danger and her doctor in legal jeopardy.

    Either version makes her unqualified for public office, in my view. Apparently not yours, and that’s your prerogative.

    Option one is bullshit. Period. It’s a conspiracy theory for which there is no credible evidence whatsoever, and, given the timing of Bristol Palin’s known pregnancy, it’s damn near biologically impossible.

    Option two is none of your goddamn business, because you are not Sarah fucking Palin, you do not know Sarah Palin’s medical history, and you do not have the right to judge the ‘riskiness’ of the actions she took while pregnant.

    You’re judging those actions anyway. Fine. But the skill set for being a good parent and the skill set for being a good politician are not necessarily the same. To argue that a woman is unfit for public office because, in your view, she is insufficiently concerned with the well-being of her children is not a feminist position, and should not be supported by feminists.

    (Also: put the passengers in danger? Last I checked, amniotic fluid doesn’t crash planes. Do you really want to argue that heavily pregnant women should be barred from flying because of the risk they they might go into labor on the plane?)

  68. anna: anna

    She knew months beforehand she was having a high-risk pregnancy and having a child with Down Syndrome. Flying to less suitable hospital hours away while in labor? The female doctors I know (who have children) found that to be absolutely ludicrous decision-making on all parts.

  69. mad the swine:

    You are taking Palin at her word about the birth dates of both children. Has she demonstrated herself to be truthful?

    Actually, I do know Sarah Palin’s medical history – at least the version she’s telling – because she has made details of it public many times in speeches. So, yes, I do have the right to judge her on it. She’s asking the public to admire her for her obstetric choices. And I don’t because as a woman who’s given birth twice, her story doesn’t ring true to me.

    “Do you really want to argue that heavily pregnant women should be barred from flying because of the risk they they might go into labor on the plane?”

    Uh, yes! That is the policy of every single airline.

    http://airtravel.about.com/od/travelindustrynews/tp/pregnant2.htm

    The bottom line is that, whether you like it or not, Sarah Palin has asked – demanded – that you consider her pregnancy and parenting when you consider her as a candidate.

  70. Oh, yeah:

    “To argue that a woman is unfit for public office because, in your view, she is insufficiently concerned with the well-being of her children is not a feminist position, and should not be supported by feminists.”

    Sorry. Nope. You don’t get to speak for all feminists.

    And anyway, if any candidate is insufficiently concerned with the well-being of their children, they are unfit for office – I mean, I’m talking beyond the usual challenges of having a parent as a public figure. I don’t want to vote for anyone who doesn’t give a shit about their kids.

    Feminism is strong enough to take me finding a female candidate to be an asshole.

  71. Shaun: ACG, have you ever actually met a Down self-advocate who preferred person-first language?

    My niece has Downs and is roughly at an age five level (she’s 12 now). Her mother says her doctor claims she’ll be one of the luckier Downs patients if she attains an age eight level. I’m pretty sure she wouldn’t even be able to articulate that she has Downs if someone asked. Her mother and father (my brother) are her legal guardians and probably will be well into her adulthood. They prefer person first language. She is their daughter first, and a Downs patient second. She is not their Downs daughter; she is their daughter who has Downs.

    If you want to remove personhood just because at age 5 no one has any idea what personhood really is given how abstract the notion is, whatever. I think we can take our cue from every other person who does understand personhood and doesn’t like to be identified first by their disorder (i.e. a bipolar person, a depressed person, etc).

    Re: the topic: anyone who legit believes Palin did not have her baby – you really weren’t on Team Palin before anyway. Who cares if she lied? You’re not going to convince anyone on Team Palin they’re wrong. Also, if your conspiracy theory requires justification about leaking amniotic fluid, you seriously need to get the hell out of someone else’s vag.

  72. “Also, if your conspiracy theory requires justification about leaking amniotic fluid, you seriously need to get the hell out of someone else’s vag.”

    Exactly what she is counting on. Only she gets to tout her amazing vag.

  73. PrettyAmiable: My niece has Downs and is roughly at an age five level (she’s 12 now). Her mother says her doctor claims she’ll be one of the luckier Downs patients if she attains an age eight level. I’m pretty sure she wouldn’t even be able to articulate that she has Downs if someone asked. Her mother and father (my brother) are her legal guardians and probably will be well into her adulthood. They prefer person first language. She is their daughter first, and a Downs patient second. She is not their Downs daughter; she is their daughter who has Downs.

    If you want to remove personhood just because at age 5 no one has any idea what personhood really is given how abstract the notion is, whatever. I think we can take our cue from every other person who does understand personhood and doesn’t like to be identified first by their disorder (i.e. a bipolar person, a depressed person, etc).

    I didn’t ask what the parents preferred. I can find plenty of parent-centered websites to tell me that. I was legitimately curious as to whether the Down Syndrome community preferred that terminology. And by the way, who are you to lecture me about personhood? The Disabled community, by and large, has rejected person-first language for decades. If you’re disabled and you prefer it, that’s your right when referring to yourself, but you don’t have the right to declare that person-first language is somehow more humane because some caretakers you know said it is.

  74. Just to clarify… if someone with Down tells me they prefer to be referred to as a PWD, I will definitely comply. What I found inappropriate was asking a question about what SELF-ADVOCATES, ie, PEOPLE WITH DOWN SYNDROME prefer, and being told what somebody’s PARENTS prefer.

  75. Rationalist, no one here is giving Palin a free pass for being a woman–we’re all quite critical of her based on her positions on the issues and her record as governor of Alaska. You’re being disingenous in saying we aren’t. I realize that twisting people’s words will make you feel like you’re not taking the same tack as most right-wing reactionary dickbiscuits out there, but most people can see right through it.

    We just have a problem with someone who buys into some tinfoil-hat conspiracy theory and then starts freaking out and aspirating on his/her own goddamn spittle over a decision she made to fly while she was in a late-term pregnancy and over her parenting skills. We tend to look askance at people who want to investigate women they don’t like based upon their medical decisions and parenting.

    I also tend to look askance at people on the internet who tell me I should pursue arguments against Palin based upon her positions and her record as governor because they apparently think I haven’t done those things. Not to mention lecture us about how we’re all bad feminists because we’re giving Palin a pass for being a woman–this, despite the mountain of criticism she’s received from feminists on this thread. Just because we don’t take this tactic out the right-wing playbook you’ve lifted doesn’t mean we think everything Palin does is wonderful. We just know that we could be next when it comes to “investigating” supposedly bad decisions we made while pregnant.

  76. Shaun,
    If you don’t mind me asking, where are you from? In my experience as part of the disability community, person-first language is preferred in the US where as it’s considered discriminatory/insulting in the UK.

  77. Shaun,
    Though I agree with you about parents/family &c speaking for people with disabilities, and not letting us speak for ourselves. It is infuriating >:(

  78. @Rationalist:

    Is there any particular reason that you have blatantly lied in comment #79? You claim that every single airline bans heavily pregnant woman from flying, but the very first one I clicked- Delta – says:

    “No restrictions for pregnant travelers.”

    Here’s a few more:

    Southwest: “Suggests pregnant passengers at all stages of pregnancy should seek the advice of a medical professional prior to travel. Recommends not traveling within 14 days of due date.” A recommendation is different from a ban, no?

    Alaska Airlines: “No restrictions for pregnant travelers. ”

    Continental Airlines: “Medical certificate required if traveling within seven days of due date. Certificate must state that the passenger has been examined and is fit to travel. ”

    United: “Pregnant passengers traveling within a month of the due date must obtain a medical certificate dated within 72 hours of departure stating that she is fit to travel.”

    Air Canada: “Travel within the last month of pregnancy is contingent on obtaining a medical certificate stating that a pregnant passenger is fit to travel.”

    In fact, I didn’t see a single airline that completely bars heavily pregnant women from flight. The few that do have restrictions all have exceptions. This is from your own link. You might have wanted to actually read it before making up facts and using this link to support you.

  79. Shaun, what I am telling you is that my niece cannot communicate at that level. And she’s fairly advanced for someone who has Downs. And even if she gets to the most advanced level expected of her, she’s still not going to be able to fully grasp a concept as abstract as personhood.

    Would you call her “retarded”? She can’t communicate that this is offensive either. It doesn’t mean it doesn’t upset her, but there is no way for her to put it into words. And again, since she actually cannot do it, the best you’re going to get are her legal guardians.

  80. PharoahKat, I live in the US. My experience has overwhelmingly been that certain parent-centered are the ones who dictate that “people-first” language is somehow more correct, even though the wider DRM, especially the Autistic, Blind, and D/deaf communities have rejected it for years. There are lots of kinds of disabilities so it wouldn’t surprise me if some groups preferred it, which is why I asked that question.

    PrettyAmiable, how the hell do you make the leap for “let’s ask the people with Down what they prefer” to “let’s call her retarded!” Seriously? Okay so *maybe* a person with Down isn’t going to understand the nuances of identity language (which you’re somehow conflating with personhood). I think asking someone what they prefer to be called is pretty fucking simple, especially as I have seen a Down person talk it before.

  81. Looking at it, Down person doesn’t have quite the same ambiance as Blind person or Autistic person–it’s characterized by someone’s name, not an adjective. I think this is indicative of the various levels of success that different groups within the DRM have had at claiming and reclaiming our own language.

    That said, I reject the right of an able person to participate in that discussion.

  82. Shaun: PrettyAmiable, how the hell do you make the leap for “let’s ask the people with Down what they prefer” to “let’s call her retarded!”

    …I didn’t? I pointed out there are other things she can’t communicate, but we still know it’s wrong to do them.

    Shaun: That said, I reject the right of an able person to participate in that discussion.

    Do I earn street cred by virtue of my PTSD? By the fact that I periodically suffer from depression? Or did you mean this is only a conversation for people with Down’s Syndrome? In which case, I’m guessing that you yourself do not have Down’s and by your own rejection of “rights” probably need to back off.

  83. Hey PrettyAmiable, it’s cool you’ve chosen to whip out your disability status now, after spending your last 2 posts arguing for a parent-centered language movement. You’re absolutely right, by the way–being disabled DOES give you the right to have a conversation about disability. It does not give you the right to talk down from a caregiver perspective regardless of your personal ability status.

    Yes, this is a conversation primarily for someone with Down. In the absence of such a person coming in to set the record straight, no, you do not get to just demand we default to the caregiver norm. Please stop trying to claim the moral high ground when all you’re doing is repeatedly demanding that we all use a norm used to make able people feel better about themselves and their ableism.

  84. Sorry, not giving it up. I can’t let Birther’s have all the fun.

    I’ll make a deal, liberals will trade Obama’s hospital birth certificate along with a DNA test from the corpse of the doctor who signed it, to be performed at his gravesite in Hawaii, thus proving Obama was birthed in Hawaii…in exchange for Trig’s birth certificate and DNA tests proving his parentage. then we can go find some other hoax to waste time on instead of discussing real issues.

  85. Anne Marie:

    “The female doctors I know (who have children) found that to be absolutely ludicrous decision-making on all parts.”

    Not this one. Mostly, I think that it’s (a) none of my business, and (b) up to the woman concerned, optionally plus her midwife or doctor if she chooses to consult them. Her uterus, her fetus, her rules. This isn’t even Feminism 101, it’s Feminism Kindy.

    In slightly more detail: I also think that a woman with four or five children who is not actually in labour (leaking amniotic fluid is not “in labour”, no way, no how, no matter how many USAn doctors try to treat it like a SCREAMING EMERGENCY OMG) is pretty bloody well placed to make her own assessment and proceed accordingly. All these years of overwrought postmorteming of a fairly everyday situation where _nothing actually even went wrong_ is just bizarre. Have you really nothing better to do?

    Rationalist:

    ““Do you really want to argue that heavily pregnant women should be barred from flying because of the risk they they might go into labor on the plane?”

    Uh, yes! That is the policy of every single airline.

    http://airtravel.about.com/od/travelindustrynews/tp/pregnant2.htm

    August has already pointed out this lie.

    For the airlines that do suggest or require some sort of certification of “fitness to travel” in extremely late pregnancy, rather than the blanket ban you so boldly assert, they are also just making things up as they go along. Since no doctor or midwife can actually tell whether a pregnant person is about to go into labour or not (cervical ripeness assessment is a pretty terrible predictor, and mandatory pre-flight vaginal examinations a fucking terrible idea anyhow), this is all handwaving liability theatre, not actual risk management.

  86. Wow. Didn’t intend to derail. But at the risk of further derailment:

    Shaun, you’re right–I’ve never heard or even asked a self-advocate to speak on the subject of person-first language. I’ve spoken to several who have explicitly and vehemently expressed the person-first concept–see me as a person, not as a product of my disability; treat me as “great” and not “great for some with Down syndrome”–and I’ve heard them refer to themselves only in person-first, but they’ve never expressed a language preference. That preference has generally come from parents and caretakers, and it was presumptuous of me to apply it to the community at large.

    My approach tends to be to refer to people as they choose to refer to themselves. As I mentioned, most people I know with Down syndrome refer to themselves as “person with Down syndrome.” And of course that’s not universal–as you mentioned, many people in the deaf, blind, and autistic communities prefer to be “autistic person” rather than “person with autism,” and I can’t not honor that. I don’t know that it can be said, though, that the “wider DRM … have rejected it for years”–most people I know within the ADD/ADHD community, for instance, prefer person-first. Most bipolar people/people-with-bipolar-disorder I know prefer person-first, although I know that varies quite a bit. (Personally, I’ll tell you that I’m a “crizz” or that I “have the crizazy,” but I don’t see that gathering a following any time soon.)

    In my experience–and it’s hardly universal–a lot of it often comes down to noun vs. adjective. I generally hear more preference for person-first language from people with “noun disabilities”–ADHD, learning disabilities, Tourette syndrome, CP, etc. But you’re absolutely right, Shaun, that the final call should come from the person with the disability in question.

    / derail

  87. More on-topic: Statements from “most obstetricians” and “all the OBs I know” and “doctors who have commented on” Sarah Palin’s flight plans have less pull when they’re not coming from Palin’s doctor. Unless “most obstetricians” were on the business end of her speculum, “most obstetricians” can only guess whether or not she was ready to fly at that time.

    Also: One more step from the TSA, and we’re all going to be getting pre-flight cervical exams anyway.

  88. ACG, I appreciate the clarifier. That wasn’t really intended to be a loaded question, but I went a little off the rails when I saw PA keep talking about “parents.”

    I appreciate your sensitivity to language, and none of that was meant as an attack on you. I’m just, personally, a bit agitated on the subject of P1, especially as as far as I can tell the entire concept was historically developed by able people, not disabled people. But, as you say about the “noun disabilities,” there isn’t really a good alternative, and upon reflection I think the problem is not necessarily with using the language itself so much as the concept behind P1 and the assumptions able people make in using it.

  89. Shaun: Hey PrettyAmiable, it’s cool you’ve chosen to whip out your disability status now, after spending your last 2 posts arguing for a parent-centered language movement.

    If you’ve been a frequent commenter (one who pays close attention, albeit) on this site, you’d know about my mental health issues. I don’t feel the need to begin every conversation about disability with my “qualifications.” If for some reason you think I’m making it up, I wrote a bit about my PTSD on my wordpress back in February. You’ll notice that I didn’t call bullshit on your relevance to this conversation though.

    Also, if you can’t see that there’s a significant difference between my disability and my niece’s, I’m not sure we should be having this conversation. I don’t think my parents should have a say in how I or others talk about my PTSD, but this is largely because I’m capable of communicating it. If I were completely unable to grasp how to talk about my identity, then I would gladly have my legal guardians step in as my advocates.

    That said, if you think this is a conversation only for those who are disabled, I would personally argue that we can talk about the disability umbrella for simplicity, but as I’ve never lived with significant cognitive-development impairments, I really don’t deserve some special voice in this discussion by virtue of my PTSD (and various other mental health issues). I was being facetious about my street cred; I really don’t think my disorders are pertinent to this discussion.

  90. PrettyAmiable, I didn’t make any assumptions about your ability status. You’ll notice in my first comment to you I said “if you’re disabled” and in my third I rejected the right of an able person to participate in those discussions. I didn’t know which you were, which is why I didn’t direct either comment at you in absolute terms. I don’t require any “proof” of your ability status–my criticism was of how you chose to frame your arguments, not whether or not I thought you belonged in the conversation.

    What I’m rejecting is the notion that able parents (or to some degree, disabled parents with a completely different disability–disabilities are not all equivalent, as you pointed out) EVER have the right to determine what is or isn’t appropriate language for a disabled person. Your niece may not be able to communicate her identity, she may not be able to communicate language preference, but there are those who can, and we should center their voices before those of able people, period.

    You say that you would be comfortable with your parents advocating for you, and it’s great that you have that trust with your parents (I’m not being facetious–it’s very good that you can rely on them to make decisions for you). Many disabled people cannot, and especially those of us with developmental disabilities have a lifelong experience of parents centering themselves in discussions about our disabilities and about us. By and large, society and nonprofits support this, and that is why parents can never be trusted to advocate about us *as a group*.

Comments are currently closed.