What would YOU do if you were in Anita Hill's shoes?

[mtnsnake]

after what happened to her almost 28 years ago.

Put yourself in her shoes just for a few minutes and think about it. With the progress for women's rights that's been emphasized over the past 3 decades, if you were Anita Hill, how would you feel today if you felt that your rights as a woman were ignored back then during the Clarence Thomas hearings that were run by Joe Biden?

Now, almost 28 years later, and with Joe Biden running for President, would you just remain silent about it if you were Anita Hill after the way she was treated, or would you speak your mind about it? We all wish this wasn't happening to one of our top-tier candidates, but what would YOU do if you were Anita Hill under the same circumstances?

If you can go back in time and put yourself into her shoes and imagine what she went through back then AND what she has been going through for the last 28 years, I'll bet anything that you would do the same exact thing that she is doing today.

[Fresh_Start]

1. Biden is not responsible for violence against women

Biden is not responsible for sexual assault

Biden probably did more for Anita Hill then was ever previously done with respect to women's complaints about powerful men.

Could he have done something different? Of course....but his actions/inactions have nothing to do with men's abuse of women...which had been going on for 1000's of years before Anita Hill.

[mtnsnake]

4. Nobody said he is, but nice try in changing the subject of the post.

[LongtimeAZDem]

7. The answer to your question is that Anita Hill should regognize and accept what "Fresh_Start" said

[BeckyDem]

87. Not too demanding, huh?

She doesn't have to accept anything from anyone.

[LongtimeAZDem]

88. No, but that wasn't the question. The question was what would I do.

[KPN]

130. But you answered with "what Anita Hill should do".

[LongtimeAZDem]

136. Fair enough; my bad

[Fresh_Start]

11. Not changing the subject just looking at what Anita Hill is actually doing....

"If the Senate Judiciary Committee, led then by Mr. Biden, had done its job and held a hearing that showed that its members understood the seriousness of sexual harassment and other forms of sexual violence, the cultural shift we saw in 2017 after #MeToo might have began in 1991 — with the support of the government," Hill wrote in a New York Times op-ed published Thursday.

She argues that there would have been a "ripple effect" had the senators shown they could "treat survivors with dignity and listen to women."

It is absolute bullshit to believe that having additional witnesses during that hearing would have changed the culture and resulted in "Me too" in 1991. The cultural norm of believing powerful men over women is long ingrained.

Biden owed her an apology about his own actions. Biden is not responsible for the rape culture, the abuse of women or violence against women.

[DownriverDem]

20. Anita Hill

should work to make things better. Biden was VP for 8 years. Where was she then? I don't understand why she came forward now.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

39. Do you think she has been doing nothing?

I would argue she has done a shit load more than Biden for helping women in the 8 years he was VP.

[trueblue2007]

123. PLEASE TELL US..... what has she been doing. Document with links please.

she's been busy doing stuff for women. I'm a woman and she didn't do anything to help me or my daughter.

[BannonsLiver]

166. Then argue it.

Last edited Sun May 12, 2019, 03:31 AM - Edit history (1)

Specifics preferred. Thanks.

[mobeau69]

105. I don't understand why she came forward now.

Same reason Christine Blasey Ford came forward when she did.

[tonedevil]

143. Maybe...

the phone call she received from VP Biden with an unsatisfactory nopology a few weeks before he threw his hat in the ring reopened old wounds and she is reacting to that ham handed stunt.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

56. Claiming you said somethin you didn't say to change the subject? Welcome to a not so exclusive club!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[hlthe2b]

2. I have great respect and empathy for her and refuse to put expections on her.

That said, I believe firmly that a great deal of her ongoing pain, regret, and frustration might be diminished if she could see some of the progress denied to women nearly three decades ago. I'd like to think if I were in her shoes, I would want to be part of that. Of course, she has every right to do so on her terms.

That said, I don't think it is necessarily fair to load all the responsibility for what did (and did not) happen during those intervening years on Biden. He has done a lot of very good things to benefit women during his later years in the Senate and while VP. Whether Dr. Hill is ready to forgive him or not, I'm more than ready to see what he has learned and will put into action.

[JI7]

3. demand clarence Thomas be removed

[katmondoo]

15. He should resign, Biden did not assault Anita Thomas did

[Iggo]

95. Hill.

And yes, he should.

[Farmer-Rick]

63. If I were in her shoes, I would be pushing to get the sexual predators off the supreme court.

Thomas is 1, Kavanaugh is 2. Are there more?

[gopiscrap]

113. bingo!!!

[treestar]

150. What is most frustrating about this

is the Thomas fades into the background! Biden is the big baddie! It is stupid.

[Autumn]

5. I would so exactly what she's doing, and rightfully so. nt

[DownriverDem]

21. Of course you would

[Still In Wisconsin]

53. Exactly- how are we gonna get Bernie nominated if we don't Franken every single democrat?

Bernie must win! Bernie must win! Even if it gets us four more years of Trump, Bernie must win!


Oh, and just in case.

[Autumn]

60. No one is Frankening Biden, that's ridiculous. Biden has a history, just like Bernie does.

Biden's actions on the Anita Hill matter are well known and there is absolutely no room for ambiguity in his part in that. I'm of the opinion Bernie or Biden are the two who may very well get us four more years of Trump.

[Still In Wisconsin]

67. "I'm of the opinion Bernie or Biden are the two who may very well get us four more years of Trump."

And yet you're supporting Bernie. Hmmm....

[Autumn]

83. Yes I am. So far Warren and Inslee have not yet moved into my top spot.

And yet you're supporting Biden. Hmmm....

[Pantagruel]

6. Sorry Anita

I'm 100% a big fan but you have to realize you're helping a self admitted, sexual predator retain power- totally unacceptable for any reason.
Suck it up.

[True Blue American]

12. Agree!

[DownriverDem]

22. I agree too!

[True Blue American]

132. Me three!:)

[Kurt V.]

27. well this is kinda gross. we, all of us, are the sum of our experiences. we really don't

know what all those experiences have been. only she does.

[Lordquinton]

36. No she isn't

it's laughable to suggest such a thing at this point in time. And disrespectful towards her and what she went through.

[LongtimeAZDem]

110. I think you should move on from this

The hearings were so long ago.

[Lordquinton]

168. It's not mine to move on from

And we are still reeling from the fallout of those hearings.

[LongtimeAZDem]

169. LOL

[DURHAM D]

64. She is not helping anyone. This post is disgusting. nt

[Iggo]

96. Okay, that's enough.

[Blue_true]

104. She may want another democrat to win and defeat Trump.

The election of 2020 is ~18 months away. A lot can happen in that time.

[madville]

8. Imagine if she continues to make it an issue after the primary

If Joe is the nominee. She will effectively be assisting the Trump campaign at that point, already giving them more ammunition as it is.

[DownriverDem]

23. Well then,

the Dems can bring forth all those ladies that trump assaulted. That would totally defuse the Anita Hill message. She should be attacking Clarence Thomas not Joe Biden.

[NurseJackie]

9. You'd lose that bet...

I'll bet anything that you would do the same exact thing that she is doing today.

You'd lose that bet, if by "you" (in your supposition) it means ME (as your respondent) I would not be doing the "exact same thing" as Anita Hill.

Nobody can change the past, but I get the impression that her desire for "revenge" (if that's what it is... it certainly seems that way) or retribution, seems to be one that (in her estimation) must be leveled at any cost and no matter what.

I'm older than she is, I come from a different generation and a different way of thinking. I'm more forgiving than she is (apparently) and I'm more willing to accept heartfelt apologies than she is (apparently). I recognize and accept reality and I'd have no expectations that I could ever go back in time and make things magically better by trying to destroy the Democrats best chance at defeating Trump.

Sabotaging the future will not change the past.

[DownriverDem]

24. Exactly

Where was she for the 8 years Biden was VP?

[progressoid]

116. LMGTFY

Hill continued to teach at the University of Oklahoma, though she spent two years as a visiting professor in California. She resigned her post in October 1996 and finished her final semester of teaching there.[44] In her final semester, she taught a law school seminar on civil rights. An endowed chair was created in her name, but was later defunded without ever having been filled.[41]

Hill accepted a position as a visiting scholar at the Institute for the Study of Social Change at University of California, Berkeley in January 1997,[45] but soon joined the faculty of Brandeis University—first at the Women's Studies Program, later moving to the Heller School for Social Policy and Management. In 2011, she also took a counsel position with the Civil Rights & Employment Practice group of the plaintiffs' law firm Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll.[9]

Over the years, Hill has provided commentary on gender and race issues on national television programs, including 60 Minutes, Face the Nation, and Meet the Press.[4][9] She has been a speaker on the topic of commercial law as well as race and women's rights.[9] She is also the author of articles that have been published in The New York Times and Newsweek[4][9] and has contributed to many scholarly and legal publications in the areas of international commercial law, bankruptcy, and civil rights.[9][46]

In 1995 Hill co-edited Race, Gender and Power in America: The Legacy of the Hill-Thomas Hearings with Emma Coleman Jordan.[4][47] In 1997 Hill published her autobiography, Speaking Truth to Power,[48] in which she chronicled her role in the Clarence Thomas confirmation controversy[4][6] and wrote that creating a better society had been a motivating force in her life.[49] She contributed the piece "The Nature of the Beast: Sexual Harassment" to the 2003 anthology Sisterhood Is Forever: The Women's Anthology for a New Millennium, edited by Robin Morgan.[50] In 2011 Hill published her second book, Reimagining Equality: Stories of Gender, Race, and Finding Home, which focuses on the sub-prime lending crisis that resulted in the foreclosure of many homes owned by African-Americans.[14][51] She calls for a new understanding about the importance of a home and its place in the American Dream.[6] On March 26, 2015, the Brandeis Board of Trustees unanimously voted to recognize Hill with a promotion to Private University Professor of Social Policy, Law, and Women's Studies.[52]

On December 16, 2017, the Commission on Sexual Harassment and Advancing Equality in the Workplace was formed, selecting Hill to lead its charge against sexual harassment in the entertainment industry. The new initiative was spearheaded by co-chair of the Nike Foundation Maria Eitel, venture capitalist Freada Kapor Klein, Lucasfilm President Kathleen Kennedy and talent attorney Nina Shaw.[53]

In September 2018, Hill wrote an op-ed in The New York Times regarding sexual assault allegations made by Christine Blasey Ford during the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination.[54] On November 8, 2018, Anita Hill spoke at the USC Dornsife's event, "From Social Movement to Social Impact: Putting an End to Sexual Harrasment in the Workplace".

[Owl]

98. Well said.

[Kahuna7]

10. She should take a bow. She should not compare

#MeToo to the real changes that occurred as a result of the Thomas hearings.

[True Blue American]

13. My bit?

The pubic hair on a coke bottle? Yet she followed Thomas when he went to another office.

Reminds me of Al Franken.

Quit whining about what took place 28 years ago. Joe Biden did not vote for Thomas. The other Senators did.

I feel the same way about Monica coming out every so often complaining about how she was treated. She did the same thing with a professor, then told his wife. Fool me once,etc.

Spare me the faux histrionics after 20, 28 years!

[JI7]

18. Monica Lewinsky is a totally different case and she never claimed sexual harassment

[True Blue American]

33. No, but she surfaces

And goes on about how she was treated. Just like the 5 women Trump placed in the front at the debate.

I am sorry, as a woman there is no way I would be complaining after 28 years. Especially since Joe tried to apologize, she refused. That is vindictive since Joe qid not even vote for Thomas, plus the fact Anita followed him today to another office. Things like this are killing the real complaints!

[Cuthbert Allgood]

40. OK. Just so we're clear.

You're saying Anita Hill blew everything out of proportion?

And then you throw out "histrionics" to boot. How progressive and supportive of women of you.

[True Blue American]

48. I am a woman

With many years experience! Do not throw that support of women at me!

I may be a woman, sympathetic with the things women have suffered over the years! I also am quite aware that all women are not perfect. Far from it. That includes me, but the well thought out post above speaks for me,too.

You will never get me to pretend anything a woman does should be excused because many are dead wrong. There is a proper way to handle things, and if you are still complaining about an incident 28 years ago, you have a problem!

END OF STORY!

[redstateblues]

126. Boom! That says it all!

[whathehell]

84. Real change has occurred as a result

of the #MeToo Movement as well.

[Kahuna7]

92. Such as? nt

[progressoid]

119. LMGTFY

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/03/07/metooglobalimpactinternationalwomens-day/

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-data-metoo-s-first-year-shows-undeniable-impact-n918821

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/28/arts/what-is-next-metoo-movement.html

https://www.voicesofyouth.org/blog/analyzing-sudden-emergence-and-impact-metoo-movement-india

[Kahuna7]

134. Stop, please. Any actions stemming from me too are directly a result

of policy and legislation passed in 1991 and after. If laws for redress had not been passed back then, they would likely be passed now. But there's no need because that work was already done.

[progressoid]

149. Huh?

The #metoo movement is global. It isn't limited to a bunch of Hollywood celebrities.

Why are you dismissing its impact?

[whathehell]

154. Nonsense..

Effective legislation doesn't take 25 YEARS to show a result..

[Kahuna7]

156. It's not nonsense. You have no idea what it USED TO BE like...

A lot of women using the hashtag, #MeToo, are from the pre Hill era when workplace harassment ran rampant. I was one of them. In the 70s and 80s I was habitually hit on in the workplace. That's my #MeToo.

I know what it was like pre Hill and after Hill. Before Hill employers got away with doing whatever they wanted there was no redress. They got away with it. After Hill, they better not think about workplace harassment. If things have gotten lax after a period of time since Hill, at least now there's redress.

[whathehell]

171. Lol.. You have no idea of my age, my gender or WHAT I've experienced!

As a female in the workplace since the 1960's, I can assure you I've experienced as much or more than you. .

[Kahuna7]

172. Psst...

And I really don't care. Do you.

[whathehell]

173. Pssst..

I can tell.

[whathehell]

153. You've heard of Harvey Weinstein, Bill O'Reilly, Charley Rose,

Mark Halpern, Louis CK, Tavis Smiley and Garrison Keillor?

They would be able to answer your question.

[Kahuna7]

157. Apples and oranges. Similar, but not the same. And from

what I can see, it's not any of them are getting away with it. So, I don't know what your point is.

Pre Hlll, they would have gotten away with it.

[whathehell]

170. Similar, but "not the same" as what?

I believe both Anita Hill and the victims of the men I mentioned were subjected to what can be broadly termed "Sexual harassement", so I don't know where you're getting the "apples and oranges" comparison.

"...what I can see, I don't see any of them getting away with it".

Um, sorry, but I have no idea what the above sentence is supposed to mean.
"
As to the claim that "Pre Hill they would have gotten away with it"...

They got away with it for 26 Years AFTER Anita Hill, so you

can hardly claim a proximal link.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

14. I'd never forgive Joe Biden - ever. I'd keep my mouth shut and not give ammunition to

anyone against him, but I wouldn't campaign for him or indicate support for him either. I'd tell people to leave me out of it.

But I'm not in Anita Hill's shoes. Whatever she does, or doesn't do, she long since earned the right to do or not do.

[DownriverDem]

25. Why do you

sound like Biden is worse than Clarence Thomas?

[50 Shades Of Blue]

49. I'm not the one who was supportive of Clarence Thomas.

[robbedvoter]

71. why keep my mouth shut? Thomas is there and now the other opressor might get up there too

So ugly to want to silence her! How many times must she be put down by you 🍆🍆?

[50 Shades Of Blue]

81. I'm not the one who supported Clarence Thomas.

[Kahuna7]

93. Biden did not vote for thomas. nt

[50 Shades Of Blue]

94. He didn't support Anita Hill either.

[Kahuna7]

100. It wasn't his job to support her. It wasn't his job to ride in on a white horse

to defend her honor. It was his job to act as an unbiased chair. He did that. That is why he doesn't feel he owes her an apology.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

101. I'd never forgive him if I were Anita Hill.

[revmclaren]

129. Will you vote for Biden

if he is the Democratic choice for president?

ONLY!!! 2019 and beyond.

[True Blue American]

131. A woman

Carries a grudge against one man, when he was one of ten or twelve for 28 years? Wonder how she feels about, Hatch, Grassley and the others who voted for Thomas? Biden did not!

Does not even consider all the laws he helped pass for women over the years?

I would say that woman has a serious problem.

[qazplm135]

16. I don't know...I'm not her

She has every right to feel, think and act however she wants to.

That does not mean anyone is obligated to agree with her though, but it's her right and obligation to do or say whatever she thinks is right.

[George II]

17. That was my first reaction too, and I can't go back in time.

[Skya Rhen]

19. For starters, I would not falsely accuse Joe of mistreating me when he clearly did not.

I would rightfully accuse Hatch, Grassley and Simpson for being disrespectful to me and ask for their apology.

Then I would forgive Biden since he apologized for his role in making some mistakes in the way the hearing was conducted.

I would forgive him because I am not a hateful person and was brought up, in the AA community, where I was taught to forgive others. As foreign and as unheard of as that might sound - Yes, I was taught to forgive...

[Honeycombe8]

35. +1. nt

[LongtimeAZDem]

47. +1

[LenaBaby61]

108. "Hatch, Grassley and Simpson."

Now, those three clowns 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 were PAST vile, nasty and dismissive of Hill.

Have any of them ever apologized to her? IF not why not?

Biden aside for the moment, but I'd be asking for an apology from them. But then again, one won't EVER be coming.

[LakeArenal]

151. Beat me to it.

Forgiveness is supposed to be for the forgiver not the forgiven.

That’s why victims often forgive their aggressors for horrible crimes. Resentment and hate ( not saying Dr Hill is a hater) are a heavy load to carry for decades.

[awesomerwb1]

26. Move on.

[True Blue American]

34. Move on

That says it all.

[DURHAM D]

66. It isn't Anita who needs to move on.

She has.

Apparently a lot of people on DU have not.

[Kurt V.]

28. there is only one person allowed to make that decision. her.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

62. Exactly right... I respect whatever Anita thinks is the right thing to do...

AND we should listen to Biden's explanations and give him some leeway, given the difficult task he had to manage.

I would, however, like to know why Anita's request to present corroborating witnesses to testify was denied and what positive steps, if any, Joe took on Anita's behalf in an effort to grant that request.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[shanny]

75. +1

[MH1]

29. I don't think I would do the exact same thing she is doing.

Of course, we never know. But I do know this - with that many years gone by, if I feel someone didn't do enough to support me way back then, but I see that in the meantime they have done constructive work, and now may (or may not) be the best person to stop a horrific tragedy that is happening before our eyes - I am pretty sure I would not want to be the person getting in the way.

I am pretty sure I would keep my mouth shut about my personal grudge (well-earned grudge that it might be) at this point, and if asked would say that the person had done some work to make amends, and we should continue to hold that person to a high standard in the present day. But the past is the past and we have all made mistakes.

You don't know me, but I know me, and I am pretty certain that is how I would handle it. Truthfully, would I let the grudge go and forgive and forget? Probably not, I am no perfect angel in that respect. But I would recognize the greater good and not use my grievance to fuck over my sisters. I would look for constructive ways to leverage the situation to extract political gains from Mr. Biden, particularly if he does win the nomination and the presidency. If I failed in that effort, at least I would have tried to make the most of the situation, not just fuck it up in a way that ends with the worst result possible.

Then again, she once took a position at Oral Roberts University. I am not sure her idea of women's rights is very much like mine, other than that women should not be harassed in the workplace.

[Butterflylady]

30. Well, for one thing

If I were as upset as she says she was back then, I would have confronted Senator Biden right then and there and let him know how I felt about what happened. Also, this is Senator Biden's third try for the nomination of President, so why bring this up now and not the other times he ran? Is it because this time he is now the front runner and she wants to hurt his chance at the nomination? Either way, I really don't think it will hurt him, as people know this is a genuine human being.

What I'd like to know is why are some people here are constantly bringing it up?

[demosincebirth]

55. Why they bring it up? They can't help it.

[emmaverybo]

31. I'd go after the Republicans who put Thomas forward and smeared me during hearings, not

Last edited Fri May 10, 2019, 05:50 PM - Edit history (1)

Biden who lobbied for me to get the hearing in the first place, voted against Thomas, had no part in subsequent smears, and, introduced the bill that became the VAWA.

I would go after Grassley, who is still alive to answer, and who, along with Republicans and Trump, was responsible for yet another hearing debacle.

I would be opening up a discussion of how we might better handle allegations like mine and Blasey-Ford’s, how more thoroughly to vet SC justice nominees.

I would expose how Republicans cynically exploited race in nominating an African-American arch conservative to replace Marshall Thurgood, a civil rights activist, so as to stave off Dem challenge. I would add that Thomas was complicit in their political game when he denounced the hearing as a lynching, thereby intimidating Dems like Edward Kennedy into pulling their punches when interrogating Thomas. And I would point out, that once again, as with Kavanaugh, they did not pick
the nominee based on qualifications, but on politics and the allegiance he would owe the party given his obvious character problems.

I would definitely point out that though today the voices of women of color are seen as vital, their strength admired, their causes a part of a movement toward greater equality, at the time of my hearing, as a black woman, my fight against sex harassment was viewed suspiciously, with a great deal of outrage directed at those who put Thomas in the hot seat because the more righteous fight then was seen as as his—against the myth of black male sexual aggression, black males gaining power and influence in white male dominated fields. I would point out that I was not fully supported by other black women; rather, I was seen as a threat to a more worthy concern, ironically in a day when I was a victim of both racism and sexism.

Given my intellect, if I were Anita Hill, I would be able and feel responsible to hold a more nuanced, and complex discussion of the issues I was a part of. I would certainly not believe these all could be put at Biden’s feet, no matter how timely that might seem due to his emergence as a front-runner.

Finally, I would apologize for making the inaccurate, inflammatory, and injudicious claim that Biden somehow held back progress in the movement against sexual violence against women—as promoted and highlighted by #MeToo—and admit that Biden, before #MeToo, was a major player in Washington in combatting campus rape and domestic violence, at the same time, that as recently as the Oscars, he confirmed his unwavering support for #Metoo advocates.

As Anita Hill, I would be forced to look at my motives for persisting in waging a campaign against
Biden’s presidential run. I would ask how it benefits me to undermine the man who,though imperfectly, did support my allegations when so many others did not.

[True Blue American]

42. 1000+

[Skya Rhen]

46. Brilliant - as an aside, someone like you would be a huge asset

in the capacity of an advisor to the campaign. You are simply brilliant!

[emmaverybo]

61. I am blushing Many thanks.

[oasis]

32. I would in no way assist Rudy Giuliani, Clarence&Ginny Thomas

and Mitch McConnell in their efforts to keep Trump in the White House.

[robbedvoter]

69. wait, are the primaries over already?

First Burnie, now you guys prohibit vetting. 🔩 that!

[homegirl]

37. Remain silent

or write a book. Maybe she believes she and all women will get a better break if Trump is reelected!!!

[Funtatlaguy]

59. Ditto

[DCofVA]

38. I'm glad she is speaking up now, and I encourage anyone who has any legitimate damaging information

...on any of the candidates, to speak up now, while there is still time. Can you imagine what could happen if they waited until the candidate becomes the nominee? I can guarantee that the Republicans will make sure that every film clip that makes the Democratic candidate look bad, will be plastered all over our TVs and Social media. If Biden can’t survive this being totally out there during the Primaries, it will be that much harder for him to win the General election.

[NYMinute]

45. Speaking out against Biden

reminds me of barking up a wrong tree.

[robbedvoter]

70. Didn't even know she was speaking out. Good for her and excellent point.

Now is the time for vetting.

[WeekiWater]

41. I don't know what I would do.

And she can do whatever she wants to do.

[MicaelS]

43. I would keep my mouth shut.

Unless I wanted to get Trump re-elected.

I am sick and fucking tired of the topic of Anita Hill. I am sick and fucking tired of people saying they won't support Biden because of Anita Hill.

This is just a cudgel to beat up on Biden. Nothing can be done to change the past. No amount of apologies will change the past. How long should one's past mistakes be allowed to haunt someone? Is it all about revenge and / or retribution? Because that is what it really seems to me. It is more than just about Anita Hill. It is about "getting back" for the way women have been treated in the past, and using Biden as the target.

[NYMinute]

44. LOL - Another Anita Hill thread to pound on Biden

I have undergone horrendous injustices decades ago and I don't come out at an opportunistic time to beat up on someone who didn't cause those injustices.

I only blame those who committed those injustices.

[True Blue American]

51. Thank you.

[cynatnite]

50. I leave it to each woman to determine where their energies are best put...

It's no different with Monica Lewinsky.

Both of these women suffered more than they should have.

They can speak out however they choose. They earned it as far as I'm concerned.

[delisen]

52. We are fighting for our personhood today in several states

with cases possibly going to a Supreme Court with 2 justices appointed by a faux president who my yet get a third appointment.

At the time of the Clarence Thomas hearing the EEOC was already under attack and had been during the Reagan/Bush era

It is not just what Anita Hill endured. It is what we all endure. It is what Hillary Clinton endured. It is what female candidates endure today-the invisibility factor in media while corporate news run by males gushes over male candidates and lets them speak in generalities and tosses them softball questions.

Watch the omen on committees-they know they are not members of the club and they hold people like Jamie Dimon accountable---so different from the time of the bank bailout when the bankers were being questioned by male representatives

It is time for our male candidates to get very vocal in demanding equality for all.

[LibFarmer]

54. Anita Hill doesn't realize one thing

The ONLY reason a lot of Democrats voted for Clarence Thomas was due to pressure from the African American constituents. (Biden voted against)

Thomas's statement of "high tech lynching by the US Senate" made a vast majority of African Americans feel sympathy for him and they pressured their Democratic senators. Now everyone knows how vile Thomas is, but back then, filling Thurgood Marshall's seat with another African American was important to the community.

No Democratic senator is pleased with having to confirm a conservative judge and but for the support by the community for Thomas, they would have loved to torpedo his confirmation.

Why doesn't Anita Hill complain about the fact that it happened that way?

[demosincebirth]

57. Forgetaboutit!

[delisen]

58. Millions of us women are in Anita Hill's shoes-time for more men to put themselves

in her shoes so they can comprehend our collective humanity-and not keep regarding life and death issues as just women's issues.

The anti-women equality laws being passed in state legislatures around the country are happening in real time

Let's not isolate and then let anti-democracy forces silence Anita Hill as they tried to silence Hillary Clinton and delivered Donald Trump to us.

I have nothing against the person ambition of a candidate but surely when one sees the blatant coordinated attack upon women's personhood it is time to take the ambition down a notch and speak up if you have a platform to stand on.

[DURHAM D]

65. Unbelievable that there are a bunch of people on here

attacking Anita Hill.

What exactly is she "doing today"?

[robbedvoter]

73. Existing? 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬

The caliber of revisionism on Biden behalf is starting to rival Burnie's. You should know what this does to voters.

[whathehell]

155. Oh please..

No one is "attacking" her -- They are questioning her attack on Joe Biden.

[robbedvoter]

68. I would be very vocal. I wouldjoin forces with Christine Blasio Ford

As long as Thomas is there, what Biden did hurts us daily. There's no status of limitation on it. I don't remember anyone saying Hillary's vote for war was "old news". yet everything Biden did seem to be - in the words of 🍊, " a long time ago"

[radical noodle]

72. If I were in Anita Hill's shoes

I probably would have tried to put it behind me until he decided to call and apologize, apparently prompted only by his upcoming run for president.

The whole thing smacks of just apologizing for the sake of putting this to rest as he runs for president, not because he really felt he did something to apologize for. Where was he the last, what... 28 years?

[shanny]

77. That's what sticks in my craw.

afaik she hadn't said anything, or put herself forward at all...until, a) the barf kavanaugh nomination re-opened old wounds; followed by b) Biden preparing to run and--suddenly, coincidentally--deciding to contact her and not apologize (publicly saying "I'm sorry for what happened / I wish I could have done something"--WTF?)

At this point, I wouldn't be silent either. She said it best: the statute of limitations has run out on an apology. Words are meaningless; only change matters.

[radical noodle]

91. As a woman who is 71

I will say that it's unlikely that any other man would have done any better than Joe did in those hearings, but that wouldn't take out the sting if I were in her shoes.

I don't think it's a deal breaker for him, but I wish he'd done things differently.

[Indygram]

74. If she isn't satisfied with what Biden has said at this point then she should...

stop expecting him to be a mind reader and just tell him what she needs him to say or do to fix it. If she can't or won't do that then she should do her best to move on. I didn't like his non-apology either, but at this point she just needs to be clear about what she needs because there is going to be backlash if she continues with the vague complaints. Just be specific and let him know how to fix it or just stop talking about it.

[shanny]

79. uh...she did that.

[Skya Rhen]

111. Really? Exactly what did she ask? Seriously.

[shanny]

112. Google's your friend. Seriously.

[Skya Rhen]

114. So you don't know either - she is very vague with her demands so that they can't possibly be met.

[ucrdem]

115. I think that's accurate. Here's what she wrote yesterday

in the NYT:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/09/opinion/anita-hill-sexual-violence.html

I've read it twice and can find no clue as to what she's asking Biden to do or what it is she won't forgive him for.

[shanny]

117. lol

She was very clear, not vague at all: nice words mean NOTHING. Apologies, 28 years on and in this context, mean NOTHING. Change of heart, change of mind, actions are what mean something...and those can only be demonstrated, not asserted.

"I've changed!" is not enough. "I understand now!" is not enough. "I wish there was something I could have done!" is REALLY not enough.

It is a simple concept: the proof is in the pudding. Do you get it now?

Sorry if that is not the answer you wanted.

[ucrdem]

122. Apologies for what? What is Biden supposed to be apologizing for? Specifically.

Thanks in advance!

[shanny]

124. oy

Honey, if you haven't gotten it by now I certainly can't help you.

Deepest apologies.

[ucrdem]

125. Meaning it's basically a nothingburger, like Benghazi.

If you can't put it into words, it doesn't exist, except as a RW meme. Am I wrong?

[shanny]

127. Lol

If you are truly interested and concerned, you could try reading what Anita Hill wrote.

G'night.

[ucrdem]

128. her NYT article? Yes I read it. She misrepresents what occurred in the hearings.

I read that too:

https://www.loc.gov/law/find/nominations/thomas/hearing-pt4.pdf

[shanny]

139. Yup. You are.

[tonedevil]

144. A call 28 years later...

when you are tying up loose ends before you start your campaign for president doesn't count. If he couldn't bring himself to do a serious apology he should have skipped it instead of half assing it.

[ucrdem]

147. So an apology for apologizing and then an apology for not apologizing?

Do you think that do it or would a shrubbery also be required?

[Indygram]

120. No, she really didn't other than making it clear that she is not satisfied

If you place expectations on another person you need to COMMUNICATE what those expectations are. If you don't do that then it's all just premeditated resentments. He's not a bad guy and he clearly wants to fix it or he would not reach out. He is just quite obviously, unsure of what is expected of him.

[shanny]

121. No, she really did.

See post +117. Problem is, specific words, or phrasing of an apology, are not enough.

There is no formula to follow, only actions will suffice...so, yes, that may be an impossible hill to climb, particularly in the context of an active campaign. Some things can't be mended.

[Indygram]

135. Saying what is "not enough" doesn't cut the mustard

When I apply for a job and I'm offered a wage I feel is not enough if I just say it's "not enough" then they are more likely to offend me with whatever else they say because I was not clear on what my expectations are.

I can't stand non-apologies and I stated so on here multiple times. What I also can't stand is unspoken expectations because they are usually premeditated resentments. People cannot meet your expectations if you do not CLEARLY state what they are. At this point, I'm getting annoyed with her. He obviously WANTS to make it right but isn't quite sure what she needs from him so she needs to just f*cking TELL him what she needs. If she's not willing to do that then she either does not want it resolved or she has ulterior motives.

[shanny]

138. Some things that have been broken cannot be mended.

The time is long, long past when saying something, in public or privately, could have made a difference.

[Indygram]

140. If resolution is not what she is looking for then she either wants revenge or has ulterior motives

And if either are the case than she is really no better than she deems him and should not be surprised when empathy wears out.

[shanny]

141. What's "resolution" in this case?

You seem to think it is her forgiving him, because why? Because it is inconvenient for him if she doesn't? She has made plain that what he has said is not enough, words are not enough, real change of heart is what is required. And that is something not easily accomplished or demonstrated. Not taking ownership, non-apologies, joking with your union bros and--especially--not doing or saying fuck all about it until running for president in the #MeToo era...doesn't indicate "real change." It smacks of expediency.

I don't get the impression that Hill gives a rip about your/our/whoever's empathy. She doesn't give a rip about words. And she is not obligated to. She doesn't owe us, or Joe Biden anything.

When you were a kid, did you have a sibling or neighborhood kid or classmate or whoever who constantly picked on you, and was constantly being made to apologize, by your mom or a teacher or whoever? Did you continually forgive that person, or did the words become meaningless, even an affront?

That is the situation with society and Anita Hill, and Christine Blasey Ford, and women in general. There comes a time when words are meaningless.

I don't get why this is difficult to understand.

[tonedevil]

145. Perfectly stated. /nt

[Indygram]

161. Don't put words in my mouth

"Resolution" means whatever the hell SHE is looking for in order for her to be satisfied with whatever he says or does so that she is able to move forward and heal. That doesn't require forgiveness unless she wants it to.

I am a survivor of long term severe domestic abuse and multiple rapes so I understand better than most. I also understand non-apologies since I have had to sever ties with two siblings for horrendous behavior towards me and upon giving them a chance to fix things I received the lame "I'm sorry IF I hurt you" garbage. I was very clear about what I needed from them, right down to explaining that a non-apology was unacceptable because they were not taking responsibility for what they did. So yeah, I have been exactly where Anita Hill is and I understand that she did nothing wrong and didn't deserve how she was treated and yes, I do think he owes her a better apology than he has given. I also don't believe that he understands what it is he is doing wrong with his apology. At this point, IF she wants a real apology and he is trying to apologize and WANTS to make it right then she just needs to tell him what he is doing wrong. The fact that she is saying she's not satisfied without doing that means that the lack of a resolution is on her. She's fortunate that he actually WANTS to make it better. I don't have that luxury and it's really difficult to heal emotional trauma caused by someone else you are constantly reminded of without a real apology because it's very difficult to forgive someone who is not sorry. Joe Biden is sorry but he doesn't know how to apologize properly. She has the opportunity to do what I will never be able to do because the person who played a role in bringing great harm to her life wants to make it right. And yes, at this point I'm growing a bit irritated with her for just complaining about it publicly instead of just telling him exactly what he can say or do to satisfy her. If there is nothing he can do or say then she should just say so and move on.

In the future you probably should not assume to know to what extent anyone understands a situation.

[shanny]

162. "it seems to me" is not equal to putting words in your mouth

that's #1.

#2 Why would you think she has not moved forward and healed? Why would you think she needs anything from him to do that? Are you putting words in her mouth or thoughts in her head? It seems to me she has moved on. It seems to me that is why his words now are irrelevant to her. It also seems to me that society has moved very little and THAT is what she is concerned with. THAT is why she has spoken out. He, as an individual, is basically irrelevant, except as a symbol.

I am sorry for your pain. I have suffered plenty myself, at the hands of family members, and have written them out of my life. I do not hate them, fear them or wish them ill--in fact I hope they are well, and can heal from their own hurts. But they are irrelevant to me now. I didn't need them to do anything to reach this state (fortunately), I did the work myself: worked past the anger, hurt, betrayal, and yes, the grief. It seems to me Anita Hill has done the same, personally. Society has not, and it seems to me THAT is the concern. It also seems to me she has earned the right to talk as much as she wishes on the subject.

[Indygram]

163. Biden is not my choice...

And I DO agree that his non-apology was crap.

That being said...all those relentless attacks about hands on shoulders in an attempt to destroy his candidacy REALLY pissed me off. That type of crap threatens to cheapen the significance of the MeToo movement.

The repeated public complaints by Anita Hill without her actually seeming to want to resolve the issue is starting to smell an awful lot like that hands on the shoulder smear that is intended to destroy his campaign. THAT is turning me off and it makes her look like she has ulterior motives. It's not a good look. Beating Trump is too freaking important and if he is the nominee and this turns into Hillary's goddamned emails then she may as well change her name to Susan freaking Sarandon. This crap needs to stop. If she wants a resolution and a real apology then say so, otherwise then put the good of the whole country first and just STOP it.

[shanny]

165. I wish you peace.

[saidsimplesimon]

76. Rec is for the mention of

Anita Hill, someone I admire. If you force me to vote for Joe or Anita, you will be making a huuuuge political blunder. The only time the voter has a voice is election time. I'm not shy or lacking.

[MaryMagdaline]

78. I wouldn't say anything

But that’s a perspective that is post-Trump. He is so horrible that I would not add an ounce of trouble to his opponent.

November 2016 we found out women are nothing. We’re not respected by men and we are not respected by our own sex. If we don’t want children, minorities and all of humanity to continue to suffer, we need to focus on removal of Trump.

But of course, I am not Anita Hill. I wasn’t personally humiliated in a hearing witnessed by millions. Giving back a bit of that humiliation would be extremely tempting.

[shanny]

82. I don't think she is simply trying for some payback.

At all. What she wants is CHANGE. And yes, if Joe Biden had taken an entirely different tack 28 years ago, we could have been a lot further along by now. #MeToo could have started a generation ago.

Specifically, we might not now have a Barf Kavanaugh on the Supremes, even if Thomas couldn't be derailed.

In my view, it was a real chance to lead, and it was missed.

[MaryMagdaline]

85. I'm not impugning Revenge motives to Anita Hill

I was saying that I would be tempted to take revenge. I should have made that clear, sorry. I’m not faulting her for speaking out. She owes absolutely nothing to the power structure.

[shanny]

118. +1

Sorry I misunderstood.

[aikoaiko]

80. I'm good with Anita Hill and letting the chips fall where they may.

Many Americans discounted Anita Hill once and it wouldn’t surprise me if it happened again.

[BeckyDem]

86. Silent? I hope we work for that to be a never.

I support Anita Hill, she can say whatever she wants, this is beyond about Joe Biden.

[Anders8]

89. In Utah, Orrin Hatch is held as a paragon of Mormon virtue...

and every time I see those hearings I'm reminded how utterly full of SHIT they all are.

[peggysue2]

90. Anita Hill is entitled to her feelings, regardless of what they are

She came through a public ordeal, was pilloried and humiliated. If anyone owes her an apology it's Clarence Thomas and the Republicans who were quite willing to paint her in the worst possible light and dismiss the harassment she'd already experienced.

I don't agree that if Joe Biden had been a stronger advocate, the MeToo movement would have been ignited then, instead of now. Twenty-eight years ago was a different era with a different mindset regarding women and sexual harassment in the workplace. It just was. In fact, it was a subject people rarely talked about. Anita Hill's testimony gave life to an understanding that this gross behavior went across the board. Didn't matter who you were, how well educated or well spoken you were, if you were a woman you could easily be a target, have your own reputation and career threatened and/or sullied by any man on a power trip.

As for what she's doing now speaking out, basically bashing Biden? Again, she's entitled to her anger. Regardless of what she says or does, she'll continue to be a standard-bearer for all working women, someone who sacrificed her own privacy to say: Enough. This was a gross violation of my personhood. It was wrong.

That's why women believed her in the first place. That, and many had experienced the same damn thing.

[Kahuna7]

97. +1000 nt

[Iggo]

99. I don't know.

But I do know this: I'm not getting between her and Biden.

[pamdb]

102. Anita Hill

Frankly, I would STFU. Biden screwed up. It was the first real notice of sexual harassment that at least I can remember.

But right now its more important to defeat pumpkin head. It's terrible what happened to her but I don't want anyone screwing up our chance to get rid of this thing squatting in the WH.

[ProudMNDemocrat]

103. What I would do is direct my attention towards Clarence Thomas, who was the harasser at the time....

And ask for an apology. (Which Thomas has not)

Also I would acknowledge that Joe Biden did his best, apoligized for his ineptness, and did what he could to rectify the situation.

I also would go on to on to be an advocate for victims of sexual assault and harassment in the workplace. Unable to let go of the past does no one any good.

[ucrdem]

107. That would be a good start.

[ucrdem]

106. OP is not quite accurate... Hill's rights were NOT ignored. Her grievances were heard by the world.

Biden as chair of the committee made that possible. I'm not sure what more she wants now, but Joe gave her all that was within his power at the time of the Thomas confirmation hearings to give her.

[mtnsnake]

109. Thank you for all your responses to this thread, everyone.

I thought your responses were all interesting, well thought out, and cordial, too, especially considering how the Anita Hill issue can get the emotions riled up a bit. Thanks again.

[secondwind]

133. I would have moved on a long time ago.

Life is short.

[loyalsister]

137. I would also talk about the racism

There was worry about appearing to be racist when Thomas called it a lynching. A Black woman orchestrating a lynching! Apparently the bizarre nature of that statement was lost on the white men in charge.
That they would respond to the possibility of looking like a racist by questioning the ethics of a Black man, and look away from any potential appearance of racism by dismissing the Black woman's claim is disconcerting.
The continuous exploitation of Black women has gone unquestioned since.
When Black women were stereotyped and scapegoated during the public debate on welfare reform. When Black women have been disproportionately imprisoned along side Black men. As Black women are disproportionately forced into an oppressive labor market. As economic pressures make it impossible for many Black women to leave abusive relationships. As Black women are disproportionately represented among the large numbers of women who continue to die in chilbirth in the US.
Black women have never not been severely punished by an oppressive system that targets both identities. And we are now seeing a Black woman being accused of trying to damage the candidacy of a white man by not being willing to sit down and shut up. Because her negative experience is read as him being mistreated.

[Skya Rhen]

142. I am a black woman and do not appreciate anyone being falsely smeared. Anita does not get a pass

on doing such smearing, with all due respect...

[loyalsister]

148. I'm not sure who you are referring to

But Clarence Thomas is the only one who claims to have been falsely smeared. I understand that some people might see it that way, but it would surprise me to hear that on this forum.

[Skya Rhen]

158. I was referring to Joe Biden who is being smeared by Hill's allegation that he treated her badly.

This is a false narrative as Biden was respectful toward her. The ones who mistreated Hill were Hatch, Grassley and Simpson and, of course, Thomas.

Note that she has never, ever asked anyone of them to apologize to her, except for Biden. Her disdain for him is intentionally misplaced.

[loyalsister]

159. Since he apologized and made statements of regret

it seems like he, unlike Clarence Thomas, does not think she smeared him. Biden was chair of the committee. He could have guided the questioning away from the victim blaming republicans. He let it go.

[Skya Rhen]

164. Biden made statements of regret regarding the way she was treated by others. He rightfully insists

that he did not mistreat her, so he has not apologized for that.

Hill wants him to admit to the falsehood that he treated her badly and he is refusing to assist her in her efforts to smear him. Fact.

The victim-blaming Republicans are responsible for their own vile attacks on Hill, not Biden.

[MineralMan]

146. Me? I'd work as hard as I could to get Democrats elected

to as many offices as possible. That's what I'd do. What I wouldn't do would be to work against that goal in any way.

Three decades ago was 1989. George H. W. Bush was in the first year of his term in office. Lots of shit went wrong three decades ago, as I remember. Made me mad as hell. So, I did whatever I could to get Democrats elected. I'm still doing that. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't.

But, whatever the case, that was always my response to crappy times in politics. I plan to do the same thing again this year and next, and the ones after that, for as long as I'm breathing.

[Hortensis]

167. "that was always my response to crappy times in politics." Yes.

Me too and so agree.

I've always been an Anita Hill supporter and I won't criticize her decision on how to best use this moment and the influence so bitterly gained. But I hope in her place I would believe the best strategy is to shine a light forward. Not forget, or even forgive, just keep the eyes on the prize. And the grave threat.

[AncientGeezer]

152. Be pissed...and rightfully so.

[Demsrule86]

160. I would stop using this for self promotion and STFU. BIDEN did nothing to her.

She has really hurt her reputation with this I think... not a word to the GOP, JUST Democrats.