I once more read where a woman (entertainer Cyndi Lauper) could sympathize with Anita Hill because she had also been sexually harassed. In my opinion, it is time women woke up and realized that Anita Hill is not the "ideal" role model in sexual harassment cases.
Assume for the sake of argument that she told the truth. The facts as I understand them to be are the following: She stated that Clarence Thomas talked "dirty" to her on a few occasions. She did not indicate to him that it offended her, and as a result of his dirty talk, she wound up for a couple of weeks in the hospital. In addition, she never told anyone, not even her roommate, or a relative any details about the experience.After this "devastating" experience, she follows Thomas from one department to another, and after he leaves the EEOC, periodically phones him up to touch bases with him. All because she states that she fears for her job and fears to lose her chance at climbing the ladder of success. This is a courageous woman?
I grant you that it would take a lot of "guts" to testify on national television about the intimate details. (Interestingly it is only when she has a national audience that she reveals the "facts" of the case fully, not when she could have discussed the issue with the FBI agents in private.) She was not assaulted or attacked, but she doesn't get the courage to come forward until over 10 years later when she is approached by the agents.
One also often hears that her story must be true because there was no motive for her to lie. How about for starters some or all of the following: Her views were liberal, Thomas' views were conservative, therefore, she abhorred his nomination; possible anger that Thomas married a white woman, reverse racism; she was ignored by Thomas and didn't get the attention she thought she deserved; she wanted national fame and power.
Isn't it time that we quit giving praise and adoration to a woman who does not deserve our praise, even if she told the truth?
Sylvia Colton
Salt Lake City