The banner on the Drudge Report this morning is that Kathleen Willey is starting a site to collect harassment claims against Bill Clinton. New York magazine, meanwhile, has the stories of 35 women who say they were raped or assaulted by Bill Cosby. I wonder if you see a connection between the two stories: Would Bill Clinton’s exploits be viewed more like Cosby’s if he was in the White House now, instead of in the 1990s?
Right from the start, when the Bill Cosby scandal surfaced, I knew it was not going to bode well for Hillary’s campaign, because young women today have a much lower threshold for tolerance of these matters. The horrible truth is that the feminist establishment in the U.S., led by Gloria Steinem, did in fact apply a double standard to Bill Clinton’s behavior because he was a Democrat. The Democratic president and administration supported abortion rights, and therefore it didn’t matter what his personal behavior was.
But we’re living in a different time right now, and young women have absolutely no memory of Bill Clinton. It’s like ancient history for them; there’s no reservoir of accumulated good will. And the actual facts of the matter are that Bill Clinton was a serial abuser of working-class women–he had exploited that power differential even in Arkansas...
I was enraged! My publicly stated opinion at the time was that I don’t care what public figures do in their private life. It’s a very sophisticated style among the French, and generally in Europe, where the heads of state tend to have mistresses on the side. So what? That doesn’t bother me at all! But the point is, they are sophisticated affairs that the European politicians have, while the Clinton episode was a disgrace.
Tuesday, July 28, 2015
"Camille Paglia: How Bill Clinton is like Bill Cosby"
"In exclusive Salon interview, the cultural critic finds parallels between Cosby and Clinton, takes down modern p.c."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
I don't know the specifics of what happened with Clinton or Cosby... only press stuff, which is totally unreliable.
Star fucking is such a common thing for young women. It's SOP in the music biz. Men (and women, too) enter the public professions partly because they want to get a lot of tail. Even at the modest level of success I've experienced in the music biz, there are always women around offering a blow job in the bathroom or the closet. Screwing to advance your career is a time honored strategy in all public professions.
I'm not arguing that abuse and failure to obtain consent are acceptable... just that it's hard to tell where the line is drawn and who's telling the truth. Women's memories of events often seem to turn on whether or not they got the career boost they were seeking from star fucking.
So, I'm pretty cynical... cynical about the claims of women who hang around people in the public professions, and cynical about the behavior of men and women who work in those professions. I doubt that the victimizer/victim thing can be easily sorted out... unless everything is videotaped, which seems to be where we are going.
But, I do get the gist of Paglia's complaint... which is that the press is treating Cosby's case a hell of a lot differently than Clinton's. And, that's clearly because of political animosity.
Cosby is that ultimate villain of contemporary discourse, the "hypocrite."
According to the left, it's preferable to espouse no moral standards at all. Those with no apparent moral standards, like Clinton, are absolved of all sins because... well, what the hell... Bill never pretended that he was anything other than a skirt chaser. Cosby preached that blacks should adhere to some type of moral standard, which is the real sin in the eyes of the left.
I've loved Paglia for some time now.
Astonishing to me that a corrupt money-grubbing conniving Marxist she-devil and her rapist husband want back in the White House, and how that is an actual possibility made possible by our current Conan Obrien/Jon Stewart cultural climate.
The press is clearly racist.
Dems for Jeb is the current big story on Drudge.
Not at all a surprise. In order to drag the corrupt she-devil across the finish line, The GOP must nominate a Bush.
"The horrible truth is that the feminist establishment in the U.S., led by Gloria Steinem, did in fact apply a double standard to Bill Clinton’s behavior because he was a Democrat. The Democratic president and administration supported abortion rights, and therefore it didn’t matter what his personal behavior was."
Screw Gloria Steinem.
Thomas -- Juanita Broadderick and Kathleen Willey were not star f*rs.
And who knows who else. Maybe Paula Jones was not so interested also. Now Gennifer Flowers -- sounds like a different script. But historically it is clear that not all the women interacting with WJC were willing and eager. and we all know there were more. Now that he's an ex POTUS women probably are throwing themselves at them so force is not required for conquest.
Since HRC never answers any questions we will never know what she thinks, really, but it's time to hold the left to their own rules and they lowered the bar so far on sexual harassment and assault that Billy-Can't-Keep-His-Plants-Zipped is dead meat.
Pants -- that's *pants* not plants.
If only it were plants.
The whole Paglia interview is fascinating and also funny. Is it possible, as Paglia avers, that a whole generation of women, the millennials, don't realize that women hold all the cards in the sexual sphere? Her point being that women are totally ignorant of male psychology, which is based on the helplessness/neediness of the little boy in relation to his mother. I find that hard to believe. I'd love to hear more comments on the whole interview from April Annie and the other gals who comment here.
At least Cosby had the compassion to knock them out first. Naked Bill is just outright cruelty.
But historically it is clear that not all the women interacting with WJC were willing and eager.
I've been around some of the most famous musicians of my era.
It is common for these musicians to assume that every woman around them is available for fucking, and they reach for the crotch immediately without the slightest doubt that their attraction will be returned.
This becomes an automatic behavior.
An assumption takes hold that the star is doing his admirers, followers or anybody who crosses his path a favor by reaching for the crotch. It's almost like signing autographs.
Without commenting on the nature of his behavior, I note that it is often reported that Mick Jagger has fucked 4,000 women! I don't doubt it. Wilt Chamberlain claimed to have screwed something like 20,000 women!
I've been around some of the most famous musicians of my era.
It is common for these musicians to assume that every woman around them is available for fucking, and they reach for the crotch immediately without the slightest doubt that their attraction will be returned.
enter political rock star Bill Clinton
What's the difference between Berlusconi and Clinton? Nothing. People got pissed because they couldn't get in on the action themselves.
AprilApple said...
Screw Gloria Steinem.
I don't think that was ever possible.
It worked with Herman Cain, so they wanted to do it to Cos. And Cos was more dangerous - Herman wanted their votes, Cos wanted them to be something.
bagoh20 said...
At least Cosby had the compassion to knock them out first
That was their price, remember?
AprilApple said...
enter political rock star Bill Clinton
The political rock star was Dick Morris, who kept Willie in office and out of jail.
Willie was just the front.
Trust me, I haven't been drinking today.
What I read of Paglia's take on this seemed typically ill-informed of male sexuality like is usually the case with most women. That's understandable because male sexuality is so raw and different from the female that it's hard to believe we are the same species.
She thinks Cosby drugged them because he was a necrophiliac, and some additional psychobabble. Women need that kind of explanation to make sense out of what is too simple from their perspective. It's not that sick or complicated. Men want to have sex with women. Their active participation is not required. Many men can get fully excited by still photos or blow up dolls.
To put it bluntly, an unconscious woman will not need convincing, will not be disappointed, critical, nor have her own timing issues. She will have no inhibitions nor be afraid or turned off by him, or what he wants. Men want sex with beautiful women. The less work and risk, the better.
Civilization and socializing usually makes us better than that, but it's not natural. Women have no idea what internal struggles we fight to live in their world, stay out of jail, and gain their approval. We are animals, but lucky for you gals, we need to be loved too.
Her point being that women are totally ignorant of male psychology...
Her larger point is that males and females alike appear to be ignorant when it comes to matters of psychology, needs, symbols and human motivations.
She says, We’re in a period right now where nobody asks any questions about psychology. No one has any feeling for human motivation. No one talks about sexuality in terms of emotional needs and symbolism and the legacy of childhood. Sexuality has been politicized–“Don’t ask any questions!” “No discussion!” “Gay is exactly equivalent to straight!” And thus in this period of psychological blindness or inertness, our art has become dull. There’s nothing interesting being written–in fiction or plays or movies. Everything is boring because of our failure to ask psychological questions.
Abuse of power, whether by powerful men or powerful women, arises out of fear and a need to control others and outcome.
Paglia doesn't come across to me as someone who is "typically ill-informed of male sexuality like is usually the case with most women". She seems to hit the nail on the head when she says, ... every man is subordinate to women, because he emerged as a tiny helpless thing from a woman’s body.
It's also fair to say that a large percentage of men received their first smile from the woman who birthed them, as well as their first embrace, their first experience of touching their lips to a female breast, and their first sensation of a female hand neutrally tending to their most private parts. When the sacred trust involved in and symbolized by those moments of intimate connection in early childhood is misused, abused, sullied, ignored, demeaned or disregarded, there is hell to pay down the road.
Cosby didn't go for knocked out females because of a natural drive to have easy uncomplicated sex. Something more was involved. Chances are good trust was broken in some significant way early on in his life, enough to cause him to break trust with others. I've not yet encountered an abuser in biographies and memoirs or in person who didn't experience abuse or severe betrayal themselves in situations where they were and felt powerless and demeaned.
Great comment Mama.
Post a Comment