Let's give the benefit of the doubt to both protagonists in the Kavanaugh/Ford controversy.
If we assume that the alleged sexual abuse really took place, it's understandable that Ford would still feel angry and seek some form of retribution for this decades-old assault. If we assume that Kavanaugh was a drunk, randy teenage boy, it's understandable that he really can't recall the event that took place 36 years ago and is angry that he is being accused of an act which he truly believes never happened.
What is not understandable, however, is why the Senate Judiciary Committee has included testimony from both parties as part of the confirmation process. The role of the Senate in confirming a nominee to be a Supreme Court Justice of the United States is to determine if the candidate has sufficient legal knowledge and experience to justify a lifetime appointment. What foolish acts the nominee may have committed at the age of 17 are irrelevant to that role.
Many of the Judiciary Committee members and the press seem totally ignorant of this distinction.