Video
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
Why Anita Hill deserves an apology
Women like Anita Hill who try to tell the truth about being sexually harassed all too often are disbelieved and even demonized. Hill testified, during the Senate confirmation hearings on the Supreme Court nomination of Clarence Thomas, that Thomas had engaged in a consistent pattern of sexual harassment of her in the workplace. And now, Virginia Thomas, Justice Clarence Thomas' current wife, has left a voice mail for Anita Hill asking Hill for an apology.
Anita Hill said she was telling the truth when she testified almost 19 years ago, and she reiterated that she told the truth after the voicemail from Virginia Thomas. "I have no intention of apologizing because I testified truthfully about my experience and I stand by that testimony," she said in a recent statement. There is not much to be gained in going over all of this again, is there?
Well, actually there might be. One gain can be visibility for the Tea Party. Virginia Thomas is a longtime conservative activist and founder of a new nonprofit group, Liberty Central, a right-wing, "libertarian" organization. She was a keynote speaker earlier this month in Richmond, Va., at a state convention billed as the largest tea party event ever.
Anita Hill deserves an apology for having her life once again disrupted and being used by a right-wing activist in what seems yet another attempt by the Tea Party to drive their extremist agenda and move American history backwards.
I think, therefore, this is not just about "publicity" but perhaps an early sign of another front opening on Supreme Court decisions, and other legal precedents, this time about laws that have secured equal rights for women in the workplace.
Sexual harassment was not illegal until a case was made that it was sexual discrimination. In her book, Sexual Harassment of Working Women: A Case of Sex Discrimination, Catharine MacKinnon, a noted legal scholar who did much to define law in this area, makes compelling arguments for why sexual harassment should be understood as sex discrimination. The connection between sex discrimination and sexual harassment was ultimately established by a Supreme Court ruling in Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson. In MacKinnon's view a new precedent had been set. She writes in "The Logic of Experience: Reflections on the Development of Sexual Harassment Law," [90 Geo. L.J. 813, 824 (2002)] that "'Without question,' then-Justice Rehnquist wrote for a unanimous Court, 'when a supervisor sexually harasses a subordinate because of the subordinate's sex, that supervisor "discriminate[s]" on the basis of sex.' The D.C. Circuit, and women, had won. A new common law rule was established."
So many women over the years have come to me in a pastoral context and told me about these patterns that constitute sexual harassment at work. They know it's wrong, they even know it's illegal, and they know they are being discriminated against on the basis of their sex. But even today many just want to keep silent because they are more afraid of what will happen if they speak up. The lesson of Anita Hill is not lost on them. Look at what happens to women who try to tell the truth? A few women dare to speak up and claim their rights to a workplace free of such discrimination, but many even today do not.
How much harder will it be for them if the Tea Party sets its sights on trying to overturn these important precedents that establish the legal arguments that made sexual harassment illegal?
In theology, we have a term called "hermeneutic of suspicion." That means being suspicious about certain interpretations in theology and the power interests they serve. I have a "hermeneutic of suspicion" that is developing in my mind about the Tea Party. And when women's hard fought rights are at stake, I want to name that clearly.
I think Anita Hill deserves an apology for having her life disrupted, but if the Tea Party sets its sights on women's rights to a workplace free of harassment, then apologies become irrelevant. What we need is to defend our rights to equality in the workplace.
By
Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite
|
October 20, 2010; 3:15 PM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: Religious labels don't tell the truth about religious belief |
Next: The stranger and the angel
Posted by: Jesusknows7 | October 22, 2010 7:12 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Having endured sexual harrassment 1st in grad school(Dr. Hoard was a married university dean at Lincoln U in Missouri)
2nd time I endured this again at a corporate sales job,Bell Telephone(he was single) then the 3rd time in my classroom while teaching in Kansas City Public School District,Mo. (KCMSD)(he was a married man whose wife was also a school principal in the district, I know how difficult telling was. The horror survives to this day as I am unemployed. Now 57 I pray for wives that never suspect their husbands. Thomas' wife has now become the harrasser. I was severely punished for speaking up each time. There were no laws protecting these long-term sexual predators.
Posted by: Jesusknows7 | October 22, 2010 7:01 AM
Report Offensive Comment
It actually does not matter if Hill told the truth or not.
Ginny Thomas made a weird/stalkerish/harassing phone call, got caught and now the TeaGOP Party is trying to act like she is a victim so no one need look closer at Thomas herself.
This is not Anita Hill's fault.
Posted by: vintagejulie | October 21, 2010 1:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Miss Hill passed a polygraph. Mrs.Thomas passed on civility.
Posted by: joecass | October 21, 2010 11:12 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Anita Hill deserves an apology to be sure, but we should not underestimate the Tea Party's opposition to women's rights. The fact that their opposition comes from women themselves is irrelevant. It is pathetic that women like Virginia Thomas, Sarah Palin, Sharon Angle, and Christine O'Donnell even profess to stand up for women at all. Here is a summary of their views as I have heard them articulated: women should be made to carry their rapist's baby even if that rapist happens to be a blood relative, rape victims should be made to pay for their own rape kit if they are sexually assaulted, no one should masturbate; and victims of sexual harassment should apologize to their harassers. My grandmother's generation was not this conservative when it came to women's rights and gender issues! We should all be very afraid of these people and not underestimate them.
Posted by: elisabetholds | October 20, 2010 9:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Clarence and Virginia Thomas have been married since 1987.
Posted by: zem11 | October 20, 2010 8:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Well, I may not have a hermeneutic of suspicion, but even I have heard of Occam's razor -- the simplest explanation is probably the best.
The simplest explanation here appears to be that Virginia Thomas is quite a flake, particularly when it comes to allegations about her husband's use of sexual innuendo with other women.
Does that theory really defy belief and require a much more cumbersome analysis? I don't think so.
Posted by: fairfaxvoter1 | October 20, 2010 7:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Natecar, ever hear of disagreeing graciously?
Posted by: binaryboy | October 20, 2010 6:53 PM
Report Offensive Comment
It seems to me there is reasonable doubt about Anita Hill's testimony. That's certainly what the Senate determined 19 years ago. If she made it up, it is appropriate to ask for an apology. If it was all true, then Justice Thomas owes her an apology. It, in all likelihood, is somewhere in the middle.
However, to take Virginia Thomas's libertarian politics as a Supreme Court drive to reverse discrimination laws is an absurd leap.
Susan, would you please give me an apology for wasting 10 minutes of my life with this idiotic article.
Posted by: natecar | October 20, 2010 5:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Isn't Virginia Thomas a prominent participant in the Tea Party? Sounds like someone is preparing for an entrance, albeit clumsy, into politics.
Posted by: binaryboy | October 20, 2010 5:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Hermeneutic" ? There you go, using them big words like you're smarter than the rest of us slobs. Don't worry, come November the easily influenced and dull normal among us will rise up to take the greatest nation g-d ever shined down upon backwards where it belongs by about 100 years. Onward reverse creationism !
Posted by: nealn | October 20, 2010 5:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The American people need an apology from the parents of Virginia Thomas, who conceived and raised such an disgusting and physically ugly human being.
Posted by: kenk3 | October 20, 2010 4:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I attended college in the 70's, the first in my family to do this. I was the 7th of 8 children. I did not know that my life would endure a rape followed by three very intense sexual harrassment experiences beginning with a graduate school dean, then my first line boss at a corporate job, and finally while trying to teach class in a public school in kansas city. I have to wonder if this is part of the reason my career and family life died. There was not ever any justice because there was no laws protecting me until the 3rd time at KCMSD schools. My heart desperately feels for Anita Hill. The wives of these men are also victims.
God know Anita Hill deserves an apology.