This is an odd one, Palins 5th child is apparantly her 17 year old daughters?

[jojosmaman]

... according to some reports in the US?

here

oh, I give up. Alright, I'm a slanderous, mysogynist, left-wing rethug. And a woman! We all are on this thread, for not having the sense or sisterliness to censor ourselves and not even mention this story, even if it be to speak of it sceptically!

Because I don't believe it is misogyny

Or maybe because of some sinister political motive? Or maybe my DP has brainwashed me with his sexist thought? Or maybe I am, in fact, Karl Rove?

yes, the rumours are scurrilous, yes they are disgraceful, yes, they are low behaviour. but they are a fact of US political life.

and they happened because she is a political candidate, not because of her gender.

should she have special treatment because she's a woman? or because she's just had a baby?

I'd find that more sexist, personally.

Dittany, calm down ffs. So I'm Karl Rove for pointing out that all sorts of male candidates and wannabe candidates have to deal with rumours, often about the parentage of a child? That's just unfair and very extreme. We are just posting on a British website trying to discuss whether reporting a rumour about a woman is automatically misogynistic, or simply part of the dirty business of US politics. You are raising plenty of rumours yourself, you know. Does that make you Karl Rove?
As a FEMINIST I oppose women who would take the right to abortion away from girls raped by their fathers, as well as the rest of us. As a supporter of gay rights, I oppose someone who fights against them.
As a rational human being I fear and oppose those who would infest schools with the pestilence of Creationism.
As a human being I oppose those in favour of guns and electrocution.
And I don't care whether that person is male or female.

So the rumour that John McCain had fathered a secret black child isn't scurrilous? Come ON! THis is what US politics is all about. And it's not the fault of some British women posting on MUmsnet because New Tricks is over.

oh, people love a good conspiracy theory. S'got nothing to do with gender.

Haven't the rumours now been confirmed? It's on Newsnight tonight.

No, you haven't seen that very particular rumour. Because of the differences& in male and female biology! A man cannot give birth! It's not their fault! It's nature!
But men are constantly accused of lying about the parentage of their (adopted) children or about fathering children that may or may not be theirs. It's the same allegation, as far as biology will allow. That of knowingly lying about the parentage of a child in order to further their political ambitions.
'accusing' a man of passing off his wife's child by another man as his own is a TOTALLY different accusation. You are basically accusing him of being a total saint and model of love and tolerance, and his wife of being a tart. Not really the same thing, is it?

Honey, if you've never seen it, I'm sure you will. If that story's out there, it'll pitch up sometime. You think reporters & internet conspiracy theorists would sit on a 'Politican didn't father his children!' story because they were sexist? This is really stretching a rather tenuous point....

Obama a creationist? Have you been listening to scurrilous rumours Dittany? Surely not!
This is what Obama has to say about religion:
?Given the increasing diversity of America?s population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.? (Boldface is mine)

?And even if we did have only Christians within our borders, who?s Christianity would we teach in the schools? James Dobson?s, or Al Sharpton?s? Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is ok and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount ? a passage so radical that it?s doubtful that our Defense Department would survive its application??

?If God has spoken, then followers are expected to live up to God?s edicts, regardless of the consequences. To base one?s life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime; to base our policy making on such commitments would be a dangerous thing.?

or because you'd need DNA evidence, which is difficult to obtain.

whereas pictures of people looking pregnant/not pregnant are pretty easy to come by, when that person is in the public eye.

riiiight, okay, so a Republican sympathiser would definitely suppress a story of the 'Democrat cuckolded!' variety out of a sense of brotherly solidarity? You need to sleep. Me too.

Goodness me, calm down. I'm not suggesting that people saying McCain fathered his adopted child is a good thing. I am merely quoting the rumour to show that - gasp! - even rumours about male candidates lying about the true parentage of their children get spread and get reported.
That rumour was just the same as the Palin rumour. That someone in the family was the real parent, yet everyone in the family lied and covered it up. So why is that scurrilous, disreputable, untrue and unkind rumour not misogynist? Oh, yes, because it's about a MAN.

(btw the difference between saying Palin lied about who is the mother of her daughter and a man being misled about the parentage of his children is really so obvious that surely I don't have to spell it out again)