Sotomayor is being interviewed for a place on the undemocratic Supreme Court. It is interesting to see the difference between these events and when Clarence Thomas the darling of the conservative right and the male chauvinist block was being interviewed in 1991. At that time Anita Hill accused him of sexual harassment. She was accused of lying. She was made to respond to the most obscene pornographic questions and images. At that time the Senate Judiciary committee which interviewed her was all male. Not a single woman on it. It is not much better today. There are two on it now. But what has changed is that tens of millions of women saw the Anita Hill savaging on TV and saw themselves in what went on. The Clarence Thomas hearing and the savaging of Anita Hill had a big affect on the 1992 elections. Millions of women related to what Anita Hill went through, the vicious sexism of the system, and in the 1992 elections a record number of women were elected, 47 to the house and six to the Senate. Of course these were not people who represented working class people but they did reflect a mood amongst women of all classes that they were not going to accept the vicious sexism anymore. In this interviewing of Sotomayor some of the worst sexist attackers of Anita Hill can now be seen bending over backward to help her through the process. They have got the message from the women voters and also the Republicans are worried about the Hispanic vote. What despicable creatures they are.
There is still a long way to go in this struggle. Women make up 50.7% of the population. In the middle class law profession they make up 48% of law school graduates, 30% of lawyers but only one member of the Supreme Court is a woman. Only 17 out of 100 in the Senate are women.
By the way I came across an interesting tidbit the other day. What does the CIA call the body that it has to run assassinations? The Health Alteration Committee. I do not know if Orwell could have thought it up.
Sean.
2 comments:
I've read that Sotomayor does not have a progressive record. By any standards, she is a non-boat rocker, towing the line and falling in line. Her nomination is calculated and political, but not really a change from before.
Thank you Lamia. I agree very much with what you say. nd I also believe that the balance of my original contribution was wrong. I should have stressed much more as you have her conservative bourgeois politics. I was too much focused on showing on how the mood of women had changed and how had an affect on the extreme right in Congress. In fact on just all in Congress. Thank you Lamia. Comradely, Sean.
Post a Comment