Search This Blog

Saturday, July 23, 2011

Message

In my spam box here on Blogger I got a comment from someone who disapproved of my Sarah Palin/sexual abuse post. I thought I would post it here, as it was the only negative comment about the post. Not sure if the commenter is a troll or what.'

If you are smart, you will take down this blog post. This isn't nice or funny. While you qualify your post by saying you this isn't true, this speculative post is just speculation. It is also libelous, and slanderous, and you could be sued.

If you want to question the mental capacity, mental acuity, or mental state, of a candidate or public figure, you can do that. Unless you make a very egregious or heinous claim that is patently false, the courts will protect you. What the courts will not protect is speculating about possible perpetrators, or saying things about minors. The mere suggestion can cause serious problems for you , and for the individuals you speculate about.

I am a blogger, a survivor of extreme sexual abuse, and a liberal, and I am not a fan of the former half-term governor.

Using the word 'cojones' is not sexual innuendo. It would be impolite to use 'balls' - don't you think? Is cojones disparaging in any way? No.

Willow Palin is a minor. David Letterman made a sexual joke about a minor. I would freak out too. Willow never ran for public office, and minor children are off limits.

Mrs. Palin did freak out over her new neighbor. And that fence, the eyesore that was constructed to block his view of the back yard, was a little over the top. The writer chose to move in next door, and again, her home should be the one respite where she and her family can relax, and not worry about intrusions. Reacting to that, does not support your statement that she was sexually abused. Even I could tell - just from watching TV, that he had a clear view of the bedrooms upstairs.

Gutless, limp, and impotent, are low blows. There are many male and female public figures that resort to gutter talk like that, reacting to unfavorable press reports. It still does not support your spurious claim. She hates the press, and feels they did a hatchet job on her. It's really the McCain campaign that kept her from the press. She should be mad at them. Regardless - this does not prove your weak point.

Were you present when the reporter interviewed Palin for the article, where she spoke of a bra? Was she smiling? Was it meant as a joke? Can you say what Palin's mood was? I suspect you weren't there. Using feminine wiles is nothing new, and hardly newsworthy. Men and women both utilise things to get the upper hand. Does that mean they were abused? NO!

You say she dresses "provactively" - I am guessing you mean provocatively. Here in the lower 48, I'd say she dresses very conservatively.

Generalizing about low self esteem, multiple sexual partners, and her Dad, is morally repugnant. Sexual abuse destroys people's souls. It takes years and years of therapy, to even begin to get over it, and some people never do get over it. And I promise you - if it was her father, she wouldn't have a relationship with him at all.

Her Dad was a teacher, and seems like a very nice man. To suggest a t-shirt, or anything else you don't like, shows that he has done something unlawful, is ridiculous.

To anyone who diminishes abuse, whether it was physical or sexual, is irresponsible and just as hateful as the person you are trying to denigrate. Statements like this cause abuse victims to relive the pain, and creates all kinds of problems. If you have any intelligence, or compassion, you will delete this post and never allege this again.

http://www.jiveinthe415.com/

16 comments:

  1. I would say that this person has serious baggage and you hit a nerve. I personally have had the same thoughts that you speculated on regarding Sarah Palin. Her use of sex to sell herself is one red flag. If you watch when she is sitting in an interview, she teases with her tongue and strokes her thigh throughout. This is not normal.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So this person says that you can't speculate about sexual abuse because you don't know that it happened even though all the signals are there? And it is so offensive because you are talking about abuse and you should delete the post? Bullsh*t. That poster needs to get off the blogs if they don't like the content. As the previous poster said, you have struck a nerve. Keep it up.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Palin has used her sexuality since day one on the public platform. Her little 'wink' during the veep debate? Are you fucking serious? who does that?? I don't recall ANY politician doing this.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Posting a comment criticizing your article is one thing, but demanding (twice) that you delete it ... ???

    That's a bit much, especially since the commenter is expressing a great deal more emotion and personal hurt than knowledge of the law -- specifically:

    "While you qualify your post by saying you this isn't true, this speculative post is just speculation. It is also libelous, and slanderous, and you could be sued."

    I'm no lawyer, but if a writer specifically states "I'm about to say something that's not true ..." then how could that writer possibly be sued for libel ?

    (It's not slander because that's defined as "ORAL communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation" -- another indication the commenter does not know what he/she is talking about.)

    Free Advice (and therefore worth every penny): should you choose to do so, consider the criticism separate from the vehemence with which it was phrased and if you decide it's at all valid, keep it in mind when composing future posts.

    However, engaging with this person further is, IMHO, a VERY bad idea in light of the extreme emotion he/she has expressed.

    Better to take the high road and just move on. (Here endeth my sermon for today.)

    ReplyDelete
  5. AND who licks her lips and strokes her thigh throughout an interview, Soapydog? I'm with you. What politician would wear a fake boob enhancing BLACK bra under a thin white shirt? Couple that with the constant references to rape and other sexual innuendos and you have plenty of reason to speculate about her sexual past.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If it looks like a "concern troll" and quacks like a "concern troll" ...

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm not a troll. I was sexually assaulted when I was 5 years old. Do I have issues? Sexual abuse, and speculation about sexual abuse, is pretty heinous, and it disgusts me. It's also sexist to suggest that Palin was abused. You will never see this sort of smear or innuendo about a male candidate. I appreciate that the owner of this blog posted my comment. Check out my blog, and you will see the numerous references to my disliking the former half-term governor and her politics. I was sincere about what I wrote, and you are free to disagree with me. Attack her politics, her views, we are in a free country - so say what you will about her. To attack me for expressing my opinion? And mostly anonymously? That is cowardly, and those commenters are the people responsible for putting the 'n' in cuts (thank you Sandy Toksvig). In my opinion, sexual abuse is stepping over the line and no laughing matter.

    Thanks to the blogger who owns this blog for posting my comment.

    http://www.jiveinthe415.com/

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm sure that is the same person who was telling Gryphen to delete your blog off of his Blogroll a few weeks back. This statement right here is usually an indicater of the "concerned troll" that "Jim in Texas" said above....

    "I am a blogger, a survivor of extreme sexual abuse, and a liberal, and I am not a fan of the former half-term governor."

    Then he...(I'm assuming it's a he because I checked out the link you posted)....goes on to DEFEND the Grifter AND Chuck with this statement...

    "Her Dad was a teacher, and seems like a very nice man. To suggest a t-shirt, or anything else you don't like, shows that he has done something unlawful, is ridiculous."

    Ummm....sure....whatever you say "Troll". I think it's the Fairy Tale Troll from Gryphen's blog...IMO.

    Congrats SPHASH....you got your first TROLL!! Champagne for EVERYONE!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Oh and one more thing....where does he get the nerve to DEMAND that you take down your post...stupid TROLLS...they get on my nerves!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Looks like you pissed in someone's cornflakes and made them chit a brick. Good job, let the games begin!

    ReplyDelete
  11. The email-er above gives his/herself away by mentioning the Letterman joke. It was a crude joke - but Letterman was not referencing Willow.

    It was SP and Todd that turned that joke into "our children are being threatened with rape" - a claim they reach for over and over again.

    By the way, author Joe McGinniss was just shy of 70 years old when the house next door was offered to him, by the owner, to rent for the summer. He would have had to climb on the roof of that house to "look through the windows" - a stupid claim. What, they don't have curtains and blinds in Alaska?

    SP with her millions could have easily purchased that house, but 1. too cheap 2. has some kind of feud going on with that neighbor. To somehow rise above a petty disagreement, to be gracious and offer a generous price for the house is beyond SP's skill set.

    But I digress. There is some kind of sexual dysfunction going on with that family; there are just too many odd clues that point in that direction.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I agree with the others; I have suspected sexual abuse for a long time and did not think your post was out of line. It seemed sympathetic and respectful to me.

    Chuck's creepiness extends beyond the t-shirt, although my dad would not only never wear a t-shirt like that but would be disgusted with whoever came up with it! The comment--on television--about kids losing their underwear set off a lot of people's red flags. I'd put it in the same league as Joe Simpson's comments about Jessica's size-D breasts: something is definitely off there.

    I did not think your post in any way minimized or trivialized sexual abuse. But your commenter said one thing that rang true: "Sexual abuse destroys people's souls." Unless she was born a psychopath, *something* destroyed Sarah Palin's soul.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I'm an abuse survivor and I believe she demonstrates the traits of past sexual abuse. She projects sexuality frequently and with the skill of someone who's been sexualized at an early age. Her behavior is innapropriate for a woman seeking any political position or leadership role. She lacks empathy and appears to be very cold - a common trait with women that have been sexually abused - no coincidence that many end up in prostitution and make bad choices with men. Many seek help and many of us are broken inside but in spite of it, we go on and try to overcome the damage. Her need for constant attention trumps any other needs. It's the only thing that keeps the demons at bay. And that's why she'll wage a desperate fight to botox her way into her 50's. She doesn't want to lose the only thing that defines her. Sexuality. No matter what she says or does, it will always surface. The worst is yet to come for her. When she hits her 50's and 60's and the game is up, she will struggle to find her worth or value - Her looks will disappear with age and her world will change. She won't know how to relate and she'll probably become very jealous (more then she is now) of her younger daughters or any other woman that still retains their youthful looks. It's insidious what sexual abuse does to a woman. She's not fooling me one bit. Been there.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I will post comments left by trolls. Their words hurt them more than they will ever hurt me. Let the games begin!

    ReplyDelete
  15. I'm not so sure the commenter was a troll. She (?) wrote coherently, for one thing, although it is apparently a very hot topic for her.

    Thing is, I have friends that were abused as children. One somehow worked out her demons, and is one of the most level-headed people I know. Another, somehow "made peace" with her abuser - I don't think I could have done it, myself, but-

    Thing is, an abuser isn't always a relative. It could be anyone is a position to coerce a kid. Essentially, even though it tends to follow an established pattern, every situation is still a little different in the details.

    That said, Palin's attitude and seeming fixation on sexual innuendo suggests (to me) that something is very much "off." Something is flat out hinky. (Very descriptive word, that.)

    ReplyDelete
  16. SP was most likely abused. She exhibits all the signs and projects rape crimes onto her children.

    Normal people don't think or speak this way.

    She dresses like a slut unless someone else picks out her clothes. She looks and acts like a retard.

    Most of the nation is hoping she announces a run for the presidency because the s*it will hit the fan if she does. Can't wait.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.