My powers of prognostication obviously leave much to be desired. I am not going to claim that my crystal ball is any clearer than anyone else's is with regard to the present state of American politics, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Trump administration's inept response, and the catastrophic collapse of domestic and global economic growth. In the midst of this frightening conjuncture of biological, political, and economic disasters, the Democratic electorate's best response, in preparation for the November general federal elections, has been the impending nomination of former Vice President Joe Biden for the Presidential election against President Trump. If, on the one hand, this should be reassuring to most corners of American political opinion outside of the loyal Republican electorate that, minimally, a potential Biden administration would be constituted by professionals who respect expert opinions on matters of importance, like the necessary steps to respond to a short term pandemic and the longer term steps to address climate change, then, on the other hand, it would seem peculiar and more than a little disconcerting that at, of all moments, we should now be confronted with the news that Vice President Biden may have sexually assaulted one of his Congressional aids thirty years ago.
Seeking to be sufficiently brief in my response here, it would seem to me that the obvious first question that might be advanced in regard to Tara Reade's allegations against Biden is "why now?". For a variety of reasons, I am going to try not to ask that question. Succinctly, I cannot step into Ms. Reade's head to inquire into her motivations for going public or her motivations for having remained silent all these years, beyond the apparent complaints of sexual harassment she reportedly made to Senate staffers at the time of the incident. There are obviously many reasons why women who have been sexually assaulted by men in positions of power might be inclined to keep their silence. On the other hand, we are standing at a moment in the history of sexual relations in the Western world in general and the US in particular when, at least nominally, we have begun to take such allegations seriously and in which we increasingly recognize that any set of circumstances that might have caused a sexually assaulted woman to avoid immediate recourse to the criminal justice system deserves to be respected. Moreover, such considerations on the sources of a delay in reporting and remediating sexual assault might constitute a broader social argument to reconsider the institutions surrounding sexual relations, definitions of consent, and the sexual dynamics of power in the workplace, as if these institutions have not been under a process of transformation for years.
Seeking to be sufficiently brief in my response here, it would seem to me that the obvious first question that might be advanced in regard to Tara Reade's allegations against Biden is "why now?". For a variety of reasons, I am going to try not to ask that question. Succinctly, I cannot step into Ms. Reade's head to inquire into her motivations for going public or her motivations for having remained silent all these years, beyond the apparent complaints of sexual harassment she reportedly made to Senate staffers at the time of the incident. There are obviously many reasons why women who have been sexually assaulted by men in positions of power might be inclined to keep their silence. On the other hand, we are standing at a moment in the history of sexual relations in the Western world in general and the US in particular when, at least nominally, we have begun to take such allegations seriously and in which we increasingly recognize that any set of circumstances that might have caused a sexually assaulted woman to avoid immediate recourse to the criminal justice system deserves to be respected. Moreover, such considerations on the sources of a delay in reporting and remediating sexual assault might constitute a broader social argument to reconsider the institutions surrounding sexual relations, definitions of consent, and the sexual dynamics of power in the workplace, as if these institutions have not been under a process of transformation for years.
If I was more conspiratorial regarding possible political motivations around this allegation, it seems fairly obvious that White, suburban women are going to be a battleground constituency in the forthcoming Presidential election, and they are capable of being tilted in many states both by Trump's record in office and by generating heinous disrepute for his Democratic opponent. Again, I don't know why Tara Reade would have to decide that now is the right time to go public with a really nasty sexual assault story, but it is really hard not to speculate that there might be cynical partisan motivations at play here, at a time when Trump is sinking under the weight of the failed response to COVID-19.
The larger problem here concerns the need to take sexual assault allegations issued by women, particularly in contexts characterized by asymmetric power relations with men, completely seriously. Of course, claims need to be validated to ensure that innocent people aren't being pilloried based on false and malicious accusations. However, the basic principle is that no person, male or female, should ever be compelled by another to engage in sexual acts without their explicit consent must be enforceable as a matter of criminal law, and, in this sense, we need to build a social consensus that accusations of sexual violence will be taken seriously, thoroughly investigated, and prosecuted to the full rigor of the law. Moreover, it isn't sufficient that such a consensus solidifies largely or exclusively within the law enforcement and criminal justice communities. Rather, we must establish a broader social commitment to the inviolability of individual personhood in deciding when and when not to engage in sexual relations and an understanding that contexts exist in which the introduction of sexual relations must be considered inappropriate. Furthermore, we must acknowledge that, in such inappropriate contexts (e.g. paid employment and other sites of asymmetric power relations), recurring patterns of sexually-oriented behaviors constitute a form of harassment. Whether sexual harassment merits the utilization of (civil) legal remedies, the broader point is that there should be repercussions for engaging in harassment as a deterrent to the recurring and prolonged creation of hostile social (especially working) environments. As I see it, this is the entire premise behind the #Me Too movement, as it has progressed from revelations of sexual violence against Harvey Weinstein, through the prosecution of Dr. Larry Nassar and the downfall of US Gymnastics, to the resignation of Congressman John Conyers in the wake of sexual harassment claims.
Acknowledging the importance of such changes in the enforcement of legal and social standards around sexual violence and harassment and the necessity that we afford a broader measure of legitimacy to claims by victims of sexual violence and harassment, the present incident of Ms. Reade's claims against Vice President Biden is just exasperating! If, on the one hand, it is difficult not to infer in Reade's allegations a cynical and partisan leveraging of public opinion to bring down the Democratic Party's best hope of defeating Trump in November, then, on the other hand, granting the seriousness of Reade's claims and the importance of granting her some measure of believability, it begs the question of whether it is even possible to locate men in positions of power who haven't, in some way, at some point, forced themselves sexually on young female subordinates. That is to say, on some level, I absolutely believe Reade's allegations - there is just too much of a pattern of men in positions of power, especially from Biden's generation, abusing their power relations to take advantage of young women and engage in harassment if not outright sexual violence.
Assuming Reade is telling the truth, however, what do we do here? I have heard multiple suggestions. A former neighbor of Ms. Reade, Lynda LaCasse, in whom she apparently confided after the incident happened, has stated that she believes Reade, but, that said, as a "strong Democrat," she intends to support and vote for Biden in November (See Asma Khalid, "Former Neighbor Corroborates Tara Reade's Sexual Assault by Joe Biden," at: https://www.npr.org/2020/04/29/847982990/former-neighbor-corroborates-tara-reades-account-of-sexual-assault-by-joe-biden). For LaCasse, "Biden isn't a bad guy...He just has this - this just happened." Former Democratic gubernatorial candidate from Georgia Stacey Abrams has stated that women deserve to be heard and listened to on sexual assault allegations and that such allegations need to be investigated by credible sources, and that she was satisfied that The New York Times had completely ruled out the credibility of Reade's claims. Similarly, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, one of Biden's former opponents for the Democratic nomination and a key player supporting the resignation of Senator Al Franken of Minnesota in 2018 on sexual assault allegations, argues that there needs to be "space for all women to come forward to speak their truth, to be heard," and she is satisfied that Reade has been accorded such a space, that her allegations have been investigated "in several outlets," and that Biden has called for such investigations to be made himself (see, Marty Johnson, "Stacey Abrams on Tara Reade Assault Allegation: 'I believe Joe Biden,'" at: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/495189-stacey-abrams-on-sexual-assault-allegation-i-believe-joe-biden). Governor Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan says that Reade's account is not "consistent with the Joe Biden that I know," although she stands by the necessity that "we give (sexual assault survivors) the ability to make their case, and the other side as well, and then make a judgement that is informed" (see Zack Budryk, "Whitmer says she believes Biden on assault allegation," at: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/whitmer-says-she-believes-biden-on-assault-allegation/ar-BB13ycR1).
In all honesty, I have a problem with these responses, one that has not been lost on numerous Republican commentators to whom it seems fine that many prominent women in the Democratic Party confer a strong degree trust in Biden's denials of sexual improprieties but would not do so back when Judge Brett Kavanaugh was getting lambasted for allegedly fondling young women back in high school during his Supreme Court nomination hearings. A little hypocrisy goes a long way! At least LaCasse's equivocation on the significance of her friend's claim, relative to her partisan standpoint, conveys something meaningful. In the end, it doesn't really matter if leading male Democratic politicians have a problem keeping their hands off of their female subordinates as long as a Democratic victory translates into the appointment of liberal judges and justices, the return to a thoroughly professional and multilateral approach to foreign policy, and a serious and sustained effort to address climate change. To the extent that I agree with such sentiments, it still says something that we can endure an occasional blind spot in our progressive commitments as the price of getting somewhere closer to the remainder of our ideals, subject to the imperfections of the two-party partisan system.
Acknowledging the importance of such changes in the enforcement of legal and social standards around sexual violence and harassment and the necessity that we afford a broader measure of legitimacy to claims by victims of sexual violence and harassment, the present incident of Ms. Reade's claims against Vice President Biden is just exasperating! If, on the one hand, it is difficult not to infer in Reade's allegations a cynical and partisan leveraging of public opinion to bring down the Democratic Party's best hope of defeating Trump in November, then, on the other hand, granting the seriousness of Reade's claims and the importance of granting her some measure of believability, it begs the question of whether it is even possible to locate men in positions of power who haven't, in some way, at some point, forced themselves sexually on young female subordinates. That is to say, on some level, I absolutely believe Reade's allegations - there is just too much of a pattern of men in positions of power, especially from Biden's generation, abusing their power relations to take advantage of young women and engage in harassment if not outright sexual violence.
Assuming Reade is telling the truth, however, what do we do here? I have heard multiple suggestions. A former neighbor of Ms. Reade, Lynda LaCasse, in whom she apparently confided after the incident happened, has stated that she believes Reade, but, that said, as a "strong Democrat," she intends to support and vote for Biden in November (See Asma Khalid, "Former Neighbor Corroborates Tara Reade's Sexual Assault by Joe Biden," at: https://www.npr.org/2020/04/29/847982990/former-neighbor-corroborates-tara-reades-account-of-sexual-assault-by-joe-biden). For LaCasse, "Biden isn't a bad guy...He just has this - this just happened." Former Democratic gubernatorial candidate from Georgia Stacey Abrams has stated that women deserve to be heard and listened to on sexual assault allegations and that such allegations need to be investigated by credible sources, and that she was satisfied that The New York Times had completely ruled out the credibility of Reade's claims. Similarly, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, one of Biden's former opponents for the Democratic nomination and a key player supporting the resignation of Senator Al Franken of Minnesota in 2018 on sexual assault allegations, argues that there needs to be "space for all women to come forward to speak their truth, to be heard," and she is satisfied that Reade has been accorded such a space, that her allegations have been investigated "in several outlets," and that Biden has called for such investigations to be made himself (see, Marty Johnson, "Stacey Abrams on Tara Reade Assault Allegation: 'I believe Joe Biden,'" at: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/495189-stacey-abrams-on-sexual-assault-allegation-i-believe-joe-biden). Governor Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan says that Reade's account is not "consistent with the Joe Biden that I know," although she stands by the necessity that "we give (sexual assault survivors) the ability to make their case, and the other side as well, and then make a judgement that is informed" (see Zack Budryk, "Whitmer says she believes Biden on assault allegation," at: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/whitmer-says-she-believes-biden-on-assault-allegation/ar-BB13ycR1).
In all honesty, I have a problem with these responses, one that has not been lost on numerous Republican commentators to whom it seems fine that many prominent women in the Democratic Party confer a strong degree trust in Biden's denials of sexual improprieties but would not do so back when Judge Brett Kavanaugh was getting lambasted for allegedly fondling young women back in high school during his Supreme Court nomination hearings. A little hypocrisy goes a long way! At least LaCasse's equivocation on the significance of her friend's claim, relative to her partisan standpoint, conveys something meaningful. In the end, it doesn't really matter if leading male Democratic politicians have a problem keeping their hands off of their female subordinates as long as a Democratic victory translates into the appointment of liberal judges and justices, the return to a thoroughly professional and multilateral approach to foreign policy, and a serious and sustained effort to address climate change. To the extent that I agree with such sentiments, it still says something that we can endure an occasional blind spot in our progressive commitments as the price of getting somewhere closer to the remainder of our ideals, subject to the imperfections of the two-party partisan system.
In November of 2016, I walked into a voting booth and held my nose to vote for a Democratic candidate with whom I wasn't terribly satisfied, for all the good it did me and my progressive ideals. Come November 2020, I will again walk into a voting both, hold my nose, and vote for an erstwhile gentlemen whose idea of subtly communicating an interest to commence an intimate relationship with a young woman in his employment is to push her against a wall, put his hand up her skirt, and finger her genitals, in the hopes that I can help avoid four more years of an arrogant, self-important, self-centered incompetent chief executive and that, maybe, some of my progressive ideals will be reflected in the enactment of federal policies. This abnegation of principle and moral sensibility should adequately stand for itself as a reflection of the rotten state of federal politics in the US. It would be a tragedy to have to endure four more years of Trump. On the other hand, it will be a travesty to pay lip service to the valid points advanced by #Me Too and turn around to put another, more respectable sexual abuser in the oval office.
No comments:
Post a Comment