Forget Madonna, Marilyn, Liz and Oprah. While it may be a testament to those icons’ power and fame that they can be recognized simply by their first names, it’s apparently a sexist degradation to Hillary (does she still use “Rodham”?) Clinton to presume the same standard should apply to the former first lady.
Don’t let the fact fool you that there’s literally a “Ready for Hillary” PAC, either. The pros get to call this their way; the antis, not so much. If you don’t have anything nice to say about Hillary … Clinton … don’t say you weren’t warned if her supporters start calling out your overt sexism the next time you forget to use her full name.
“[S]ome Americans, mostly women, don’t think the former secretary of state, U.S. senator from New York and first lady should be called by just her first name,” McClatchy reported Tuesday in a story that made liberal use of the “some people say” journalistic device.
“As Clinton gets ready to kick off her campaign for the White House, some wonder whether calling a female candidate by her first name reinforces gender stereotypes,” McClatchy wrote.
Nothing else in the report credits a specific pro-Hillary group with making that assertion; rather, the story cites this review of Clinton’s 2008 campaign messaging, relying on a collection of anecdotes to flesh out the varying opinions of folks on the street.
But there’s at least one group <a “nofollow” href=”http://personalliberty.com/things-female-reporter-cant-write-hillary-clinton-without-accused-sexism/” target=”_blank”>out there that’s attempting a similar co-opting of words’ meaning, threatening to out as sexist any reporter who uses descriptors like “calculating” and “polarizing” to describe Clinton.
Hillary Clinton, that is.