In a television appearance, Carly Fiorina, McSlander supporter and once-touted running-mate, was asked what she thought of Tina Fey’s SNL skit as Sarah Palin. Having taken a long, hard slug of the Kool-Aid, she said:
I think that, of course, the portrait was very dismissive of the substance of Sarah Palin, and so in that sense, they were defining Hillary Clinton as very substantive, and Sarah Palin as totally superficial. I think that continues the line of argument that is disrespectful in the extreme, and yes, I would say, sexist in the sense that just because Sarah Palin has different views than Hillary Clinton does not mean that she lacks substance.
The perceptive reader and viewer might think that by comparing Palin to another woman the SNL writing staff would have been immunized from accusations of sexism, as any comparisons would have had to be made based on something other than gender. Apparently not, because they are using the new Nancy Pfotenhour definition of sexism:
- sexism [sek-siz-uhm] -noun:
1. any discussion, description, or depiction of Sarah Palin that would lead the viewer/reader/listener to the mistaken impression that she is not a maverick sub-deity that single-handedly transformed Alaskan politics leading to a golden age in the north
2. not applicable to discussion, description, or depictions of Hillary Clinton (see substantive criticism)