Whose Nailin' Palin?

Screenshot from the beginning of "Whose Nailin' Paylin" by Hustler.

Collected: 2/11/09







Porn/Movie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1NpyK_-Zk4

You need only watch the first 90 seconds of this video to get a feel for what was done to Sarah Palin. The link is to a clip from a porn made by Hustler. The porn (titled: "Whose Nailin' Paylin) features someone impersonating Sarah Palin. The impersonator has sex with two Russians whose tank broke down outside Palin's "house". One can clearly tell the person is not actually Palin, the whole piece is very corny.

This relates to politics because this would never be done to a male politician and if it was, most people would find it weird and gross. Since Sarah is a female, people will have a very different reaction. at least a portion of the American public will enjoy this mockery of Palin. Many may even find it tasteful. This goes to show how women in politics are treated differently than men.

If the porn Palin herself and not a fake, Palin would be deemed a "slut" and a woman with bad morals. If it were a male politician he would be given praise for being a "pimp", "stud" or "playa", a male that has promiscuous sex with many sex partners. Our society looks up to men like this and expects this kind of behavior out of men. This is just an example of a double standard for men and women. This double standard is a quite relevant topic to this video and is the reason the video relates to women's studies. It proves the theory in women's studies: that men and women are treated differently by society.

The video also illustrates the fact that the structure of our society is paternalistic and thus relates to women's studies. The very law allows this, it is sexual harassment but no sexual harassment charges can be filed because it is protected by free speech. This raises the question as to whether free speech should protect the sexual harassment of public figures. As it is now the law doesn't affect men because men are rarely the target of sexual harassment, so by allowing sexual harassment it is subordinating women. That is definitely paternalistic.

This porn relates to male privilege because it could be illustrating a deep dark secret of our society. The porn could be a subtle attempt to keep women out of power. It could be someone trying to keep women down by hurting Palin's good name. I don't think so, but then again according to feminist theory, men are taught to overlook their privileges in society, and I could be overlooking my privilege as a man to run for office and not have the opposite gender against me just because of my gender. You decide.

Either way the fact that people can sell something like this without causing an outrage doesn't harm or help men or women in our society. It just proves that there is a market for this kind of material in our country. That speaks poorly of the overall character of our country in my opinion. Furthermore, this is objectifying women and undermining their legitimacy in politics. Whether intentional or not, it definitely will change the way people look at Palin for the worse and is a setback for women in society.

( addition written on 5/1/09):

Now that I have had the class for a lot longer I have learned a lot. I realize now that this porn does illustrate a setback for women, because if any woman tries to run for office she has to face obstacles like porn made about her. It also shows that we appreciate things which objectify women like this porn.