I believe Anita Hill

It's hard to believe, looking at the woman in this photo, that she could be anyone but a mild-mannered professor.  In this photo, taken in October, 1991, Anita Hill was being sworn in at the start of her appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee.  She was there to testify about her former boss, Clarence Thomas.  You might recognize his name--he's now a Justice on the United States Supreme Court.
Anita Hill had worked for Clarence Thomas in 1981, when he was head of the Office of Civil Rights at the Education Department in Washington, DC.  She also worked for him at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 1983.
Ms. Hill found out Mr. Thomas was being considered for an appointment to the Court when she was approached and asked about her time working for Thomas.  The questions were appropriately vague--looking for verification of facts and dates.  For how on earth could the interviewers know, or even understand what had happened in 1981 and again in 1983?  How could they know to ask Ms. Hill specifically about the work environment as it pertained to sexual harassment?
In the interests of disclosure--from now on, most of the rest of this blog is my recollections and my opinion.  NOBODY but Ms. Hill and Mr. Thomas know what truly happened.   But I believe Anita Hill.  I have for 20 years, and I firmly believe there is a man on the Supreme Court of the United States that does not deserve to be there.
By all accounts, Anita Hill was, and is, a quiet and private person.  I don't think she wanted to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee--what woman in her right mind would willingly open herself up to the questions that were asked of her, the jokes that were made?  What woman would willingly re-live painful instances of sexual harassment; not only re-live them, but tell an enormous television audience EXACTLY what had happened?  What kind of woman would open herself up like that?  A brave one--Anita Hill.  She knew what Clarence Thomas had done to her in not just one position of power, but two.  Why two jobs?  Why did she follow him to another agency?  Well, he had stopped harassing her, so she thought she could safely assume Thomas had become a professional.  Unfortunately, she was wrong.  She had to leave the job in 1983 because the stress had begun to have an effect on her health.
When Anita Hill heard Clarence Thomas was being considered for the Court, she must have had a very difficult choice to make--keep quiet and allow him to sail through the nomination process, or expose him, and in the process, herself?  Thank you Anita Hill, for doing the right thing.
You see, back in 1991, not many women were willing to talk about sexual harassment in the work environment.  That doesn't mean it didn't happen--it happened more than people thought it did, because it was the dirty little secret that nobody talked about.  Because women were embarrassed, men could safely get away with it.  Men like Clarence Thomas--he got away with it with Anita Hill and at least 2 other women--2 other women that were also willing to testify but who were not allowed.  It's hard to believe, looking back, that Clarence Thomas could not only sexually harass one woman, but who could keep on doing it--because nobody was willing to talk about it.
Sexual harassment in the workplace happened--I know it did, because it happened to my mother, and to other women who couldn't afford to report it--literally couldn't afford it in most cases.
Anita Hill was grilled by the Senate Judiciary Committee.  It was a low moment in this country, and yet it was a turning point too.  Many, many, many women were inspired to step forward with their own stories.  But mostly women were angered--angered at the treatment of a woman who dared to tell the truth.  After watching those hearings, women turned their anger into action--they decided to work for getting laws on the books that would allow women to take action against sexual harassment, they wrote letters, they decided to make their voices heard.
But most of all, women decided to run.  To run for office--in record numbers they ran, for every office at every level of government.  When asked why they were running, they would cite Anita Hill and her treatment as a catalyst.
Sadly, Anita Hill's testimony had no impact on the decision to appoint Clarence Thomas to the highest, most prestigious Court in America.  He's there.  He's there, and he's still angry.  He's angry and sullen and does not participate at all when the Court is hearing cases.  I've seen him first-hand, and he's a disgrace to his office.  When I was there, I watched him lean back in his chair, sigh, roll his eyes when one of the female justices asked a question, and generally look annoyed at being there.  I just wanted to go up and use my "mom voice" to ask him, "Are we keeping you from something, Clarence?"
Sadly, he's there, and even worse for our country, he's being heavily influenced by the extreme right--for goodness sake, his WIFE works for the largest Tea Party group in America (the conflict of interest is extraordinary).
And sadly, his anger will motive him to stay.  Why's Clarence Thomas so angry?  Because Anita Hill was telling the truth about his disgusting perversion of power.  I believe Anita Hill.  And I thank her.  

What I Haven't Heard....

So the Republican "presidential candidates", pretending they care, have been arguing about whether 6th grade girls should be forced to be vaccinated against the human papillomavirus (HPV).  Yes, HPV is a real threat, as exposure to it can lead to cervical cancer (and a host of other health issues); keep in mind HPV is spread through sexual contact.   I do not dispute this. 

I've read about the political debate; read the asinine rhetoric of Michele Bachmann and the real (and suspect) reasons that Rick Perry gives for supposedly caring about 6th grade girls.  I've wondered how this is flying with Tea Party folks and Libertarians--how they feel about government intrusion of this nature, and then I remember that the Tea Party and nationally known Libertarians don't give a shit about government intrusion in the lives of anyone who is female.  Or gay.  Or an immigrant.

But I would like to share some thoughts on the subject--thoughts I've had that I haven't seen anywhere else.  [Maybe there's a reason for that.]

First of all, I'm sad that young girls have to be vaccinated.  At a time when their bodies are changing so quickly, when their emotions are all over the place, and when they are having sexual feelings that can be overwhelming, they are being told they have to go to the doctor to get a shot.  Do you remember getting shots as a kid?  They hurt, and they were no fun at all.  Sometimes, it was scary to see that needle.  So imagine how you would have felt, as a girl-on-the-verge-of-womanhood, being told it was time to go to the doctor for another shot involving a big needle?  You probably would, logically, ask what the stupid shot was for.  So, you're a parent, being asked this question by said girl--how do you explain HPV???  You probably stammer, stutter, and say something intelligent like, "It's for your own good.  Because....er.....you're becoming a woman!"

Think about that statement.  Really think about what you've said to this young girl. 

You've just told her that she's being hurt for her own good.  Because of sex. 

Damn, that's a really great thing for a soon-to-be-woman to hear.  Because if I were her, I'd be hearing that I had to get a shot because of sex.  And from now on, I'd experience sex with a mixture of pleasure and a wee bit of fear, because I had to get a shot for it all those years ago. 

Which all brings me to one last question:  if HPV is spread by sexual contact, and can cause health problems for all humans, why aren't 6th grade BOYS getting the vaccine too?