Sarah Palin's "boobgate"

[Monkeyleg]

Since Palin showed up at the Belmont Stakes wearing a slightly form-fitting t-shirt, the blogosphere has gone wild with accusations that she had breast implant surgery. There's something like 18,000 results if you search for the story.

Aside from the voyeuristic appeal of the story, there's also the hate factor, as evidenced by this story from "E! Online": http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/the_awful_truth/b185102_did_sarah_palin_get_new_boobs.html

That's just downright mean, gutter-level writing. I'd love to see what would happen to anyone who wrote a similar piece about Michelle Obama.

[Sergeant Bob]

It's what they do.

[Doggy Daddy]

The whole article seemed like a major case of sour grapes to me.  I mean, we gots Sarah, they gots Pelosi, Clinton, etc.

If I was Ted Casablanca, I'd be pissed off too!  (Is that the name he was born with, or did he have it "enhanced" to improve his marketability?) 

DD

[Monkeyleg]

If I was Ted Casablanca, I'd be pissed off too!  (Is that the name he was born with, or did he have it "enhanced" to improve his marketability?) 

I think "We'll Always Have Paris (Hilton)" was taken.

[Perd Hapley]

That's just downright mean, gutter-level writing. I'd love to see what would happen to anyone who wrote a similar piece about Michelle Obama.

It's funny how left-wingers get all conservative and judgmental about dress codes in these situations. 

[MicroBalrog]

How is it a 'gate'? Suppose Palin got enhanced, what is the problem? What am I missing?

But then this is not the first time I read anti-plastic-surgery bias in 'leftist' media.

[Monkeyleg]

How is it a 'gate'? Suppose Palin got enhanced, what is the problem? What am I missing?

She jokingly called it that in an interview. The subject came up, she dismissed it by saying she hadn't had any surgery, made some comment about the media, and called it "boobgate."

[Perd Hapley]

What am I missing?

At times, I would also like to know what part of you is missing.     You're aware that Palin's political appeal has already been dismissed as superficial, right?  

[Jocassee]

The woman is, quite frankly, attractive, and the lefties can't stand it. Not sure why.

[MicroBalrog]

At times, I would also like to know what part of you is missing.     You're aware that Palin's political appeal has already been dismissed as superficial, right?  

By liberals. Who would love Palin to be superficial, because they are afraid of what they think she stands for.

And by North-Eastern Conservatives. Who would love... you see where this is going.

[Boomhauer]

The woman is, quite frankly, attractive, and the lefties can't stand it. Not sure why.

Because to them, she's on The Other Side and must be utterly destroyed. She cannot be allowed to be popular.

[lee n. field]

She jokingly called it that in an interview. The subject came up, she dismissed it by saying she hadn't had any surgery, made some comment about the media, and called it "boobgate."

She labeled it "boobgate"? 

Love it.

[Perd Hapley]

By liberals. Who would love Palin to be superficial, because they are afraid of what they think she stands for.

And by North-Eastern Conservatives. Who would love... you see where this is going.

Actually, I can't.   

[Nick1911]

Oh man, you mean Sara Palin is a woman, and women have breasts? 

Who would have thought.    When you can't attack someone on their beliefs, attack and ridicule the person.

[roo_ster]

I'm currently agnostic on the issue of [google spider on] Sarah Palin, breasts, boobs, tatas, bazooms, balongas, hooters, honkers, tater tots,... [google spider off] since, having been a professional when it comes to the marketing of feminine endowments, I have long since learned not to yearn for those things I cannot see, feel, touch, taste and measure.

I am, however, amused by the frothing search on the Left for whether or not Sarah Palin's pair has grown.

Seems to me what the Left should be asking is not if Sarah Palin's pair has grown, but when their president plans to grow a pair.

[MicroBalrog]

Actually, I can't.   

What I'm trying to get at is why these people think it matters to people who are not members of their little circle.

[BridgeRunner]

But then this is not the first time I read anti-plastic-surgery bias in 'leftist' media.

When I was very active on a "crunchy" mommy board it was always hilarious watching the tap-dance of conflicting ideologies whenever gender reassignment was raised.  On the one hand, they were supposed to support alternative gender expression.  On the other hand, they conflated "natural" with environmentally sound, and felt like somehow someone's plastic boobs were going to starve the spotted owl to death, or something.  In any case, it ain't "natural."  Well, and the whole "self-esteem" issue.  No matter how homely or hideous one looks, it's somehow wrong to not take pride in one's appearance, and to recognize or (horrors!) change an undesired trait is somehow indicative of deep personal problems.

[roo_ster]

...change an undesired trait is somehow indicative of deep personal problems.

In some cases it really is.

I liken the Ts in GLBT to the obviously mentally ill folk who want to amputate a limb for no good reason(1).

To call them mentally ill, though, is a crime against PC because they have managed to glom on to the homosexual band wagon and share in the mass delusion that such practices are just wuuuuunderful and beyond criticism of any kind.

Ts are deserving of pity to the same extent as any mentally ill person.  Those who perform the surgery and those who enable the practice, however, are vile creatures on par with those who scam the elderly or those who sexually abuse children.  Hell, they are worse, leaving the object of their efforts a mutilated male or female for the rest of their days.




(1) Many of whom respond well to antidepressants.  Hmm, maybe the problem was not a surplus of limbs...  Also, those who managed to get a limb amputated and those who manage to get "sex-reassignment" surgery generally demonstrate no improvement in mental state.  Again, the problem ain't a surplus of limbs to the wrong pieces parts.  The problem is a ways north.

[MicroBalrog]

Many of whom respond well to antidepressants.

Except that reassignment therapy is not tried until after other options have been exhausted, and not until after a person has lived a year or two in their true gender.  Several doctors need to approve the surgery before it can be tried. Had the patient responded well to AD drugs, he wouldn't have gotten to the surgical stage.

[roo_ster]

Except that reassignment therapy is not tried until after other options have been exhausted, and not until after a person has lived a year or two in their true gender.  Several doctors need to approve the surgery before it can be tried. Had the patient responded well to AD drugs, he wouldn't have gotten to the surgical stage.

Whoopty-freaking do. 

Mental illness that does not respond to meds does not mean it is not mental illness.  If that were the case, there were no true crazy folk until the first meds came out and someone's condition was not improved by them.

The fact that many do respond well, though, is a hint that the problem is in their heads and not their dangly bits.

"true gender"

That sort of fantasy would provoke mirth were it not so destructive.

[MicroBalrog]

The fact that many do respond well, though, is a hint that the problem is in their heads and not their dangly bits.

And for the ones where the problem is 'in their heads', the surgery is not performed.  What's your point?

[roo_ster]

And for the ones where the problem is 'in their heads', the surgery is not performed.  What's your point?

Stated in the first complete sentence of the post:
"Mental illness that does not respond to meds does not mean it is not mental illness."

[Stetson]

roo_ster,

Not to interfere with you and MB, but what gender is someone with XXY chromosomes?  Say, Kleinfelters Mosaic?

I look forward to your explanation.

[taurusowner]

If I have a broken computer, that doesn't make it a new and special kind of computer.  It's just broken.  I view gender identity illnesses and genetic anomalies the same way.  A male who views himself as a female is broken in some way.  Yes they are people who are just as valuable and worthy of every human right and freedom as the rest of us.  This is not a statement of value.  But the fact remains that they are outside of what could be considered a fully functioning human.  The human species is a dual-sex organism that requires both to reproduce, just as with many animals.  Our sex organs are designed to facilitate this.  If your brain chemistry, or the physical makeup of those sex organs is in such a way that makes that sort of reproduction impossible, you are essentially malfunctioning.  I view the idea of homosexuality as being genetic under this same light.  A bear that has a genetic predilection to not reproduce is a malfunctioning bear.  A male fish that has a genetic predilection not to fertilize female eggs is a malfunctioning fish.  And a human that has a genetic predilection to have sexual relations that cannot under any circumstance result in reproduction is essentially a malfunctioning human.

I just don't believe in a world where we declare absolutely everything to be just as good and normal as anything else.  This is not a statement about the value of a person.  This is not a condemnation of how people choose to live.  If a male human decides he'd rather wear dresses and do other things that females usually do, that is his choice.  But I'll call it how it is: a male who has certain tastes or desires.  Not a female trapped in a males body.  Simply put, your true gender is your gender.  Not whatever desires your mind has constructed for itself over your lifetime.

[Sergeant Bob]

If I have a broken computer, that doesn't make it a new and special kind of computer.  It's just broken.  I view gender identity illnesses and genetic anomalies the same way.  A male who views himself as a female is broken in some way.  Yes they are people who are just as valuable and worthy of every human right and freedom as the rest of us.  This is not a statement of value.  But the fact remains that they are outside of what could be considered a fully functioning human.  The human species is a dual-sex organism that requires both to reproduce, just as with many animals.  Our sex organs are designed to facilitate this.  If your brain chemistry, or the physical makeup of those sex organs is in such a way that makes that sort of reproduction impossible, you are essentially malfunctioning.  I view the idea of homosexuality as being genetic under this same light.  A bear that has a genetic predilection to not reproduce is a malfunctioning bear.  A male fish that has a genetic predilection not to fertilize female eggs is a malfunctioning fish.  And a human that has a genetic predilection to have sexual relations that cannot under any circumstance result in reproduction is essentially a malfunctioning human.

I just don't believe in a world where we declare absolutely everything to be just as good and normal as anything else.  This is not a statement about the value of a person.  This is not a condemnation of how people choose to live.  If a male human decides he'd rather wear dresses and do other things that females usually do, that is his choice.  But I'll call it how it is: a male who has certain tastes or desires.  Not a female trapped in a males body.  Simply put, your true gender is your gender.  Not whatever desires your mind has constructed for itself over your lifetime.

Agree completely.