Can't believe a woman said this

[Sausageeggbacon]

This comes from America so less surprising than a woman saying something stupid about rape over here but read this and see what you think. My heart goes out to those women who are suffering and alone because someone is making a political statement.

[icepole]

She sounds misinformed, I doubt it is a small proportion at all. How depressing.

[KRITIQ]

Governor Haley is a member of the Republican party which is the more conservative of the two main parties in the US. Furthermore, she is aligned with the right of that party and endorsed by the "popular" "Tea Party" movement, which by British standards at least would be considered to be quite right wing.

She supports measures to restrict access to abortion, including mandatory 24 hour waiting periods and the very controversial measure that women must submit to ultrasound (and if required transvaginally) and have the results explained to them before they can be considered for a termination. I believe she also opposes widening access to contraception.

I wouldn't actually expect a Governor with her "politics" to support measures to prevent or support victims of domestic abuse or sexual assault, either. Her philosophy would be that these aren't public health issues, but matters to be addressed by the extended family, the church and the community and if required, the criminal justice service or social services (i.e. removing children who are at risk.)

It might seem counterintuitive that a woman politician could support measures likely to have such a detrimental impact on other women, but there are plenty of examples of people who appear loyal to their politics way before they are loyal to their identity or other people like them.

Haley is also a woman of colour - her parents were immigrants from India and until her marriage to a Christian was Sikh. However, she has also supported very repressive policies on immigration, for stopping and searching people "suspected" of being illegal immigrants and has not supported measures that would encourage more positive "race relations." So, there's another seeming contradiction for you!

Not surprisingly, she's been subject to sexist and racist slurs by her opponents (both those who think she's too liberal and those who think she's too conservative,) which is unacceptable. Criticise her political stance, yes. Criticise her personal identity, no.

While her political views may seem hypocritical in the extreme, there is also a general philosophy within the American "value system," that any person can achieve whatever they want, that they can "rise above" restrictions like sex, race and class. I'm pretty sure she would say that that is what she's done (with the added statement that if she can do it, anyone can and shouldn't be pandered to.)

[namechangeguy]

The USA constantly surprises me. I think a lot of Brits assume that we are close in our outlook on major issues due to the shared language, and some common cultural points of reference such as films, TV and music. Scratch the surface though, and there are some huge divergences. Religion is a major one, especially in relation to it's influence in government, and it taints everything that it touches. Attitudes to the poorest in society are another.

People should be reacting as angrily on here towards this woman as they would if a man had said it. What is sad is that people are willing to cut her some slack, such as proposing that she is misinformed, purely on the grounds that she is a woman. If she was a man, s/he would be accused of hatred towards women, being a misogynist, propping up the patriarchy, supporting the rape myth etc etc.

[KRITIQ]

I don't actually agree that people are more likely to "cut her some slack" on her political views because she is a woman. If anything, she's likely to come in for more criticism. Like the OP, it may be expected that she will have more compassion on issues that affect women, so be more critical of her than they would be of a male politician saying the same thing.

And, as mentioned, she will be in line for slurs related to her identity as a woman of colour which wouldn't be the case if she were a white male leader.

If there are people who give her more leeway, citing that she "must just be misinformed," then surely they are being patronising, speaking from the view that women can't be expected to understand complicated things like politics. That's hardly showing their esteem for women leaders or for women in general.

[namechangeguy]

I can see in the second post on here that she 'is probably misinformed'......

[KRITIQ]

Ah, I saw that statement as meaning icepole thought she was relying on inaccurate statistics about sexual and domestic abuse when making the statement about these services not being required. I didn't see it as her trying to excuse or justify the Governor's decision to veto the proposal.

[namechangeguy]

I doubt that anybody could achieve what Nikki Hayley has achieved if they are dumb, i.e. lacking in intelligence. She does not appear to have come from 'money', a la George W.

Perhaps she is proof that women can be just as cynical, opportunistic, ambitious and downright uncaring as men. Perhaps, if/when we have a fairer society with equal opportunities for both sexes, we will see both men and women displaying the same disdain for their fellow humans as our male politicians currently display.

[SmellsLikeTeenStrop]

She's a Republican and she's endorsed by the Tea Party, she was never going to be a shining light for women's rights - which is pretty much what KRITIQ said.

Her exact words were.

?Each of these lines attempts to serve a portion of our population for which we extend our sympathy and encouragement, but nevertheless, it is only a small portion of South Carolina?s chronically ill or abused. Overall, these special add-on lines distract from the agency?s broader mission of protecting South Carolina?s public health.?

I don't think she's even misinformed, just a politician pandering to her voter base and making statements which have no foundation in reality.

[KRITIQ]

Yes Smells, that's it exactly.

We know individual human beings can be nice or nasty, generous or selfish, regardless of sex, ethnicity, class, age, etc. There isn't alot of point in holding up the example of a woman who has sexist views or an older person who is ageist or whatever. It doesn't make any difference to our understanding or dismantling of institutionalised discrimination and oppression.

Focussing on the "women can be nasty, too" angle just sounds too much like, "they're all as bad as each other, so let's not bother about trying to deal with inequality," which is another way of saying let's keep the privileged privileged, okay?

[namechangeguy]

I didn't mean it like that. I can see how it looks though on re-reading. Sorry. I just despair about human nature sometimes. The old thing about 'power corrupts....'

I am in the UK so I usually only see the US from afar, so perhaps I am not best placed to judge. Are Hayley and Palin just the most high-profile of the Tea Party women candidates? Where does Anne Coulter fit in? I do get to see Fox news, and I love it and marvel that a news station could be so openly biased (and wrong!). Apart from Hillary, who do the Democrats have of similar stature? And is her political stock as high as it was a few years ago? Would she ever run for the White House?

[namechangeguy]

I don't mean I judge US politics as Fox present it, just I love its absurdity.

[SmellsLikeTeenStrop]

Ann Coulter is a professional troll is a right wing political commentator and author.