In 1991 Anita Hill made us start thinking about sexual harassment. Now, with the debut of the documentary Anita: Speaking Truth to Power, she’s making us think about what’s changed 23 years later.
Back then, sexual harassment was still a relatively new concept. It wasn’t until 1975 that the term even appeared in The New York Times, and when it did, the paper organized a definition of it in bullet points, to suss out exactly what this foreign idea entailed.
It was the beginning of an entirely different era, particularly with regard to women in Washington. When Hill went before a Senate Judiciary Committee of all-white male senators more than two decades ago, her testimony sparked a backlash that still reverberates. Where were the women senators?
The hearings helped inspire the campaign of Democrat Patty Murray of Washington state who, upon watching Hill testify, told her friends she was running for the Senate in 1992. That year would also see Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer elected to the Senate, making California the first state to be represented in the upper chamber by two women. It was the year that Carol Moseley Braun of Illinois joined the Senate, and the first year that four women were elected to the Senate in a single election year.
After Hill’s testimony in Washington, D.C., sexual-harassment claims shot up. (It’s easier to speak about sexism when someone’s helped define the vocabulary.) “Our phones were ringing off the hook with people willing to come forward who had been suffering in silence,” Marcia D. Greenberger, founder and copresident of the National Women’s Law Center in Washington, recently told The New York Times. And Congress passed legislation granting sexual-discrimination victims the right to sue for damages.
Journalists hailed it as the “Year of the Woman,” but Sen. Barbara Mikulski wasn’t buying the sound bite. “Calling 1992 the Year of the Woman makes it sound like the Year of the Caribou or the Year of the Asparagus,” the Maryland Democrat said at the time. “We’re not a fad, a fancy, or a year.”
When 2012 was dubbed Year of the Woman by media outlets such as Mother Jones, The Washington Post, and Salon, beloved lady columnist Ann Friedman similarly dismissed the label, noting that nine out of every 10 states still had a male governor and women’s representation had been stagnant since 2007. “We’ve made some incremental progress since 1992, but to achieve gender parity in Congress and secure women’s rights more broadly, every year has to be a Year of the Woman,” Friedman wrote at the time. “And not just in the campaign headlines, but on Inauguration Day.”
If Anita Hill were to testify before today’s Judiciary Committee, she would face three female faces in questioning; they include Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Feinstein, and just one woman of color, Sen. Mazie Hirono. That may not sound like much, but it’s three women more than when Hill first went before the committee in 1991.
Should Republicans take back the Senate in 2014, as poll analysts like Nate Silver are now predicting, those numbers could be even worse — which is to say even more uniformly white and male. (There are currently no female or minority members on the GOP side of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the side of the committee that would likely expand given a Republican victory, though it’s conceivable the three Democratic women would all stay on the committee and some new freshman women could come on as well.)
But that there has already been progress, however incremental, is undeniable. At the time Hill testified there were just two women serving in the entire Senate: Mikulski and Nancy Kassebaum of Kansas. Today there are 20.
“With the three Democratic women on that panel, I can imagine that the dynamic would be a lot different today,” says Marcy Stech, a spokeswoman for EMILY’s List, the political action committee that helps elect women who support abortion rights. “But we have more work to do, which is why we at EMILY’s List are focused on electing more women in 2014 and we’re excited to see the impact that more and more women can make once they get to Washington.”
The documentary is now playing at theaters in New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco.
What We're Following See More »
The FBI this morning issued a statement saying it is "investigating a cyber intrusion involving the DNC," adding that "a compromise of this nature is something we take very seriously." Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton's campaign is suggesting that the hack "was committed by Russia to benefit Donald Trump."
A group of delegates loyal to Bernie Sanders is actively exploring how to challenge Tim Kaine's nomination for the vice presidency. A lead of the group "said he hoped the Democratic National Committee releases information within hours on how to submit a challenger to Kaine, which he said would require the signatures of 300 delegates. He said they have until Wednesday morning to file a challenge to Kaine and stressed that while his group would take any requests from the Sanders campaign under consideration, the delegate group is an independent organization."
Here are some more numbers out of Utah that should frighten Donald Trump—and give hope to Gary Johnson. "An internal poll conducted for Rep. Mia Love two weeks ago found Trump at 29 percent, Clinton at 27 percent" and Libertarian candidate Johnson at 26 percent. "That was, however, before Trump picked Indiana Gov. Mike Pence." Utah party chairman James Evans said that move ought to clinch the state for Trump. "Utahns are going to come through because the level of distaste for Hillary is so deep," he said.
"Trump will try to steal some of Hillary Clinton's thunder during the Democratic National Convention here this week with a slate of swing-state appearances that will test the appeal of his new running mate. ... Pence will join the GOP presidential nominee at stops in Virginia and North Carolina on Monday, Florida on Tuesday and Pennsylvania on Wednesday, according to a campaign schedule. Other GOP allies will hover around Philadelphia for counterprogramming during the Democratic gathering."