It is truly amazing that anybody takes seriously the Herman Cain sexual harassment mania. Given the history of “sexual harassment” over the past 30 years, you’d think such charges would be greeted with hysterical laughter rather than earnest lip pursing over whether Cain has been sufficiently “out in front of” the story and all the Watergate mongering about how it’s always the coverup that gets them rather than the offense.
Let’s face it, “sexual harassment” has been since its inception a racket promoted by feminists who suffered from what might be called black people envy: If only women could obtain a weapon like the black civil rights movement’s scarlet R, a weapon so terrifying that no man would dare say or do anything that might result in his being banished to a shameful exile from respectable society and from which there would be no hope of return.
Sexual harassment was a creation of feminist professors (like Catherine MacKinnon) and promoted by media feminists like Maureen Dowd, Jill Abramson (now New York Times chief editor) and Jane Mayer (the New Yorker Magazine). It’s debut as a political bludgeon was in the infamous Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill show.
Let’s briefly review. Thomas had undergone at least three Senate confirmation hearings without a single woman coming forward to accuse him of anything inappropriate. People forget that his Supreme Court confirmation was already over when a couple of Democratic Party operatives and the NPR yenta Nina Totenberg pressured Judiciary Committee chairman Joe Biden to reopen the hearings to hear Hill’s story.
And the accusations? Thomas, she said, asked her out a couple of times (both were single at the time) and he made a few lame jokes about pornographic movies (Long Dong Silver and a pubic hair on a Coke can). Thomas survived this onslaught, but for years the media continued to portray him as some sort of pervert.
But ironically, Thomas was redeemed by none other than Bill Clinton. Democrats like to believe that Clinton was attacked for merely having consensual sex. Put aside that before Monica Lewinsky the feminists told us that there was no such thing as consensual sex between a powerful man and a subordinate woman. In Clinton’s case, it was sex between the “Most Powerful Man in the World” and a lowly unpaid intern.
What Democrats conveniently forget is that Monica Lewinsky first surfaced as a witness in a civil rights case of sexual harassment brought against Clinton by a former Arkansas state employee who alleged that Clinton, when he held high state office, brought her to a hotel room where he then dropped his pants and ordered her to kiss his favorite organ. If you believe her, and let’s not forget we were told during the Thomas-Hill affair that women don’t lie about these things, it is hard to consider this tawdry behavior as consensual.
But they weren’t the only “non-consensual” victims. There was the case of Kathleen Willey, a Democratic Party worker, whom Clinton “allegedly” groped in the private study of the Oval Office when she asked him for a job after her husband’s death. And let us not forget Juanita Broaddrick who described how Clinton lured her to a hotel room and raped her. Both Willey and Broaddrick were Democrats and perfectly respectable women, but the feminists who sanctified Anita Hill had nothing to say in their defense. Nor did they have anything to say when Clinton toady James Carville smeared Paula Jones as trailer park trash.
Given the past 30 years of sexual harassment politics and all the hypocrisy, you would think liberals would not want to go there anymore. I guess they just cannot help themselves.