I know I should ignore Palin’s twit, but…

I was recently wondering, around the 90th anniversary of women’s suffrage in the USA, “Who hijacked feminism?”  Was it me?  That would be nifty, but instead, the celebutwitter who has most recently and famously appropriated feminist language is Gov. Sarah Palin.

An increasingly active social networker, Sarah Palin has recently tweeted her support of various candidates, her opposition to the mosque in downtown Manhattan and, on the 90th anniversary of women being allowed to vote, her thoughts on the feminist movement. On the latter point, she wrote yesterday: “Who hijacked term: ‘feminist’? A cackle of rads who want 2 crucify other women w/whom they disagree on a singular issue: it’s ironic (& passé).”

You might be thinking, “no, no, prof, she’s criticizing feminists, not hijacking feminism,” and I would agree, except that I also read Jezebel’s coverage:

Sarah Palin is not pleased with EMILY’s List‘s grizzlies parody ad, adding on Facebook, “Lying about a sister while wearing an Ewok outfit is no way to honor our foremothers on the eve of the 90th anniversary of their victory.”

A sister?  Does this make Sarah part of my cackle?  A rad, even?  Please, someone, start the t-shirt sales.

3 thoughts on “I know I should ignore Palin’s twit, but…

  1. I thought only caricature feminists in films set on American university campuses actually used “sister” unironically. Usually accompanied by a raised fist.

  2. Quote from Palin just in from cnn:

    “Those who are impotent and limp and gutless and they go on their anonymous – sources that are anonymous – and impotent, limp and gutless reporters take anonymous sources and cite them as being factual references,” Palin said in her criticism of the press. “It just slays me because it’s so absolutely clear what the state of yellow journalism is today that they would take these anonymous sources as fact.”

    She seems to think it isn’t manly to use anonymous sources, I guess.

  3. In fairness, Palin’s objection to the repeated use of unattributed anecdotes, etc., in the Vanity Fair piece (to which she is presumably referring in jj’s CNN quote) seems valid enough, and because the piece was a highly personal character attack, it’s also understandable that she would find it hard to remain detached and cool about it.

    On a related note, Melissa McEwan over at Shakesville notes the sexist subtext in the Vanity Fair article on Palin:


Comments are closed.