If, for some strange reason, you find yourself not wanting to watch one minute and 38 seconds of Bristol Palin‘s parenting, let me summarize for you: Bristol takes her son, Tripp, with her to visit her sister, Willow. Tripp, who is four years old now (Bristol is 21, just so you know), is in that adorable “I hate you” stage that most children go through. Bristol tries to get him to stop saying it by telling him that God is watching him, but she starts laughing before she can finish. Tripp looks like he’s about to start a big ol’ hissy fit, and Bristol and Willow keep laughing. After another “I hate you,” Willow tells Tripp that if he doesn’t stop, she’s going to wash his mouth out with soap, and Tripp replies with “go away, you f-ggot.” Yeah. That’s still apparently funny to Bristol and Willow though, and then Bristol admits that she’s “doing a terrible job disciplining Tripp.” Right.
Look, I know that kids will hear bad words and repeat them, and I get that sometimes it’s kind of funny. But there’s a line, you know? One time, a kid that I was babysitting had apparently heard the word “shit” recently, and she kept repeating it. She’d just play with her toys and say it, over and over, and I explained to her that she shouldn’t be saying that word, but it was hard to keep a straight face when this tiny little toddler looked at me and exclaimed “shit! Shit!” But this other time, this other kid I was babysitting had heard someone say “adios, fat ass,” which is something that people say, I guess, and when she repeated that, it was definitely different. There was no laughter because what she was saying was mean, even though she didn’t know it, and there’s no chance that I was going to have any part in egging that on.
Babysitting is, I’m sure, a whole lot different than being a parent, but I can’t imagine watching your child call someone a f-ggot, especially when it’s clear that he has at least some grasp that the word is hurtful, and laughing. I would imagine that the conversation that would follow that would be a very serious one.
But hey, it’s not really that surprising that a Palin kid has homophobic slurs in his vocabulary, is it?
1) Given the authority to do so, I would instantly remove any child from the care of a parent who would actually force soap into that child’s mouth. It’s hardly the most evil practice in bad parenting, but it’s unacceptable. It shouldn’t be threatened.
2) Exactly. It’s NO surprise that hateful slurs are a part of this child’s vocabulary. Now, Tripp likely has no idea what it means, and even if the definition were explained to him, I don’t think that he would really understand that it’s, well, a very loaded and harmful word to use.
3) When I was three or four, I saw Ghostbusters and walked around the house saying: “Shit!” My mother then explained the word’s meaning. Even when I was a toddler, I was disgusted by the very existence of excrement, and I never said it again until probably middle school. But I was a notoriously reasonable child.
I’m sure Bristol will giggle just as precociously when Tripp is on trial for his first ‘big boy’ hate crime. Maybe the penal system will do a better job ‘disciplining’ her son.
*my first swear was ‘oh f#%ks’ when I wet my pants in line at Disney land. I was 2. My mom was mortified, my dad tried to hide his laughter in a hacking cough. Apparently he did not succed.
fortet the kardashians. tell me these people arent making money letting thier child do this.
he said “go away you fuck” not faggot
So, everyone is not OK with either fuck(er) or faggot.
By the way, faggot is a pejorative and hasn’t been associated with homosexuality but with useless men in recent times.
It used to be associated with old women and/or widows (again, as a pejorative) since they used to gather firewood to sell.
In that sense it is awkward and may have relevance to “gay” as crappy or bad.
But … everyone is OK with how much that boy is hitting and kicking? He’s badly mannered and strikes out quite a bit.
Although, he’s on teevee and is likely to act out for attention.
Anway, his mom’s freakin 21. She’s not fit to be a mother either in age or temperament. The kid would’ve been better off if mom would’ve raised it. That is how it is pretty much done in modern US society.
Man. Everyone just *LOVES* to bash Bristol, but then again, she made herself a “reality star”, so I guess she’s fair game.
I don’t believe anyone is ‘okay’ with Tripp’s hitting, kicking, or violent actions; I think his behavior is more horrifying BECAUSE it is attached to hate speech.
Regardless of whether he said ‘you fuck’ or ‘you faggot’, his words followed aggressive, unwarranted physical assaults. This is learned (and apparently accepted) behavior. Tripp displayed violent and hateful personality traits with either term.
People *love* to hate Bristol Palin because she makes it so very easy. Whether Bristol is proselytizing religion and morals (that she herself does not follow) or criticizing other young mothers, Bristol shows no hint of self awareness, no sign of ANY redeemable qualities. Bristol Palin is a boil on society, something reasonably easy to cure, but too gross for most of us to deal with.
OK. I think the hitting (and his general manner) is the worse of the two, but you’re right. The two actions together spell trouble. In the end, though, he is a young kid. I’d have to watch him interact with other kids before I could tell. I wonder if he’ll be home schooled.
I think its a little much to call his actions “hateful” although I’d go with disrespectful for sure.
I also think that a certain segment of the population dislike Bristol because of her mother. Neither of them has done that much to earn such hate except espouse views contrary to progressive beliefs. I’ve always found it odd that a supposedly egalitarian party becomes as hateful as Westboro to a group whenever they feel like it. (Not that I’m saying you’re doing that, of course, but it has always been a point of wonder for me.)
And Bristol’s a freakin 21 year old baby. Who, in even an off-kilter mind, would take advice from a 21 year old? Of COURSE a 21 year old doesn’t show any self awareness, morality, or common sense. She’s a BABY!
I actually didn’t know about her “Obama advice” until I looked it up. Wow. LOL. But she’s a baby. What the hell does she know about anything?
As for the rest, I’ll go with hyperbole and let it stand with that.
I will leave you with a (couple of) question(s) to ponder though …
(Although don’t think that I’m requesting you answer them. Feel free if you wish.)
Do you think it would be better to have a single parent (male or female) or two parents of the same sex? (Of whichever sex they may be.)
Which do you think Bristol would choose?
Do you think she had considered an abortion? Do you think her mother did?
How smart is Bristol, do you think? Average? Above average? Below average? (Not her wisdom. She’s obviously a baby.)
How come no one hates on Levi Johnston? He’s already knocked up someone else. HE is reprehensible far more than Bristol. Why no venom at him?
My dislike for Sarah Palin comes from a lot more than that. I have a darling friend who has very different views than mine in a lot of areas. In addition to being really uninformed about a lot of things, Sarah Palin is just a bad person. I disagree with Dick Cheney about a lot of things, but while he’s done bad things, I don’t think that he’s a bad person. Sarah Palin is.
I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with having a single parent, but it would probably make life easier to have two parents, so two parents of the same sex would be fine. I don’t see how that would be a problem.
Bristol would choose single parenthood. I know that she does not support marriage equality. I’m sure that she would find some reason to believe that same-sex parents are somehow inadequate.
Sarah Palin is so vehemently opposed to abortion that she would not allow for exceptions even in the case of rape or incest. Personally, I cannot imagine having a child at that age–single or with an involved other parent.
Ya know, it’s funny you should mention that (to me) hard-line abortion stance.
I spoke with a friend of mine about it (he a staunch Catholic). He’s opposed to all abortion too, and normally a rational fellow.
But he refuses to budge even after lots of telling arguments to the contrary (we’ve argued this topic now for … a decade?). He actually believes that the kid and mother would be better off having the child. I believe that is such a horrible position that it beggars belief.
I just don’t understand how a woman could take that position (such as the aforementioned Sarah). It isn’t and never has been an original position of any religion. The Catholic’s take is life begins after the quickening, when the soul supposedly enters the fetus. They’ve bounced back and forth.
Exodus also mentions it, which means it is in the Torah. (Shemot, for those of you who care.)
But, historically, women weren’t treated all that well, so a natural change of perspective was due.
My friend, a grand-master historian, turns an active blind eye to historical fact. It is just weird.
I argued from ethical (ethos), logical (logos), and emotional (pathos) angles. I used biblical scholar studies, ancient and papal codices (books), famous citations, medical, and even metaphysical studies.
His answer: “Fuck you. God said so.” I am honestly at a loss for such brick-headed close-mindedness, even denying the logic and wisdom of his very own god. This guys is smart, too. It’s like he has specialized brain damage.
Angry Pirate, I completely agree. I have a few anti-abortion friends (and I think that there’s a difference between pro-life and anti-choice . . . but that’s a distinction that not everyone uses with those terms), and while I really do mean a SMALL few, it still weirds me out.
I’m not apologetic at all about being pro-choice. I’d be the same way if blood transfusions or appendectomies were illegal, and though many people do, *I* personally do not see a huge distinction in those various procedures. But I usually don’t make that analogy in discussions with friends who disagree on the subject.
Anti-abortion. I find that term curious and have brought it up before in numerous arguments.
I’m anti-abortion, in that I’m not FOR abortion. I wish we never had to have a single one. But I’m pro-choice, in that I support a woman’s reasoned decision to have one.
As to a comparison with other medical procedures. I’m thinking about that one. I’d have to consider it differently based on how it occurred.
On one hand, in cases of rape, I’d consider it equivalent to cancer or an injury inflicted by another being. The psychological trauma makes it so much worse. How could ANYONE, with any conscience or empathy at all, condemn a woman to carry such a child to term against her will?
On the other hand, in cases of an “oopsie”, _EVERY_ woman I have ever seen that has had or talked about having an abortion has heavily and emotionally considered the result. I feel women, and their female support group or peers, to have a greater insight into what is best for them. I could not, in good conscience, force them into a path I could never take. Attempts at state-sponsored coercion (waiting periods, sonograms, and other dreck) earn my vilest derision.
In the third case, which we haven’t discussed, is to save the life of the mother. In such cases, reason dictates conservation of the viable organism. Biology does this partly anyway. I can’t find anyway that any other outcome would be ethical or compassionate. I would not “play dice” with the mother’s life.
Nor, for that matter, (rejecting choice) could I then stand before some god of whatever religion, and so state my actions without feeling shame. I feel that strongly about my position.
Though it might seem arrogant, my belief is so strong that I feel any god that wouldn’t understand isn’t worthy of me.
I feel that I have reasoned appropriately and meditated/prayed on my position enough.
But, I also have respect for those that feel that “life” begins at conception. However, I feel that a woman’s choice up to an arbitrary point (for me, the “point of squeamishness” is 3 months or so) is uniquely her decision as the burden falls directly on her.
If they develop a method for removing a developing fetus from one woman and implanting it in another (who so chooses), then I would find that more-beneficial. I would then have to reconsider my opinion. However, in a mammalian species, I imagine it’d be difficult. Obviously, due to moving and reattaching the placenta while maintaining viability of an embryo.
Quit calling this mother a baby. I have known many women who became mothers as teenagers and managed to step up to the job by putting their childrens needs ahead of their own. Bristol Palin chose to raise her son as a single parent and therefore forfeited her “baby” label. Why would you defend her awful parenting especially when she describes herself as a role model for teen mothers?
As far as a lack of Levi bashing, logic should tell you it’s because we don’t know jack shit about him except what the Palin family says. A powerful family that has been caught in many lies (pants on fire for Sarah) and has ganged up on a “baby” (according to your definition) is not to be trusted. He doesn’t have the means or the power to hire a PR team like the Palins. Would you like to go up against the Bush family for example in a public war of words? Do you think you would be a match for them?
I haven’t seen the clip but I imagine he’s angry partly because they are ridiculing him, unintentionally but that’s still what’s going on. And it’s not right.
What a couple of twats.
I still cant’t get over that child’s stupid fucking name.
It’s easy to sit back and judge people but why don’t all you negative bitches and bastards walk a mile in her shoes…. I would laugh if a 2 year old said faggot too or any cuss word because for some reason its funny so pull the corn cob out of your butts and quit judging numb nuts!¡!
Why on earth would I want to ‘walk a mile in her shoes?’ I expended years of energy attempting NOT to walk in Bristol Palin’s shoes, ie higher education, excellent job, happy and secure marriage, solid sense of self and propriety and I’m STILL not ready for parenthood….I’ve never understood the concept of ‘walking in her shoes’ as a reasonable retort because even if I WERE in her shoes I would have made different desicions. Bristol was a priviledged child with numerous opportunities that most young mothers never receive. Bristol did not have it hard, she made questionable choices and continues to do so. I feel no sympathy for Bristol, I feel sympathy for her son. One might wonder what deficiencies cause so many to ‘identify’ with such a miserable example(s) of motherhood and America.