Even though I suspect I'm doing permanent damage to my soul, I continue to watch CNN, mouth agape, as more news comes in about the candidates. The Hillary Clinton stuff is disappointing, but kind of what I expect from politicians. I know “business as usual” is why some people won't vote for her; my take is that humans are still humans. Even if they come to politics with the highest aims and firmest ideals, good intentions are quickly eroded by power, the need to work with people who don't have the highest aims and firmest ideals, or a combination of both. Regarding collusion between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation, we humans tend to do business with the people we know, if possible, or the people recommended by people we know, before we do business with people we don't know. We're not supposed to act that way when we're in government, but this sort of corruption makes me yawn. I know it shouldn't.
The accusations of sexual assault leveled against Donald Trump make other people yawn, apparently, or at the very least, there are people who question the timing. I believe that the women who came forward were triggered by the Billy Bush video and Trump's subsequent denial that he had ever acted on his words. I also believe that they said things to people in their inner circle, but not in public because he is so well-known. My reasons are very personal: I have my own version of such a tale.
My experience
In 1996, I was the piano soloist for a performance of the Gershwin Concerto in F with the Tallahassee Symphony. A reviewer wasn't overly enthused, but Gunther Schuller, who was the guest conductor, said my version of the piece was one of the best he'd heard. After the last concert, he came off stage, his face slick with sweat, grabbed me, and tried to kiss me on the lips, even though he'd met my husband and my parents (which shouldn't matter). I recoiled in horror.
Very few people know this story. In fact, I might not be writing this for a wider audience if he weren't dead, because he's famous and respected, and who the heck am I? Regardless, I still hoped he would engage me for another performance. I figured he had gotten the message about whether or not I was interested, and since he was a famous musician who apparently loved my playing, I thought my career would benefit.
It is through this experiential lense that I absorbed the disorienting juxtaposition of Michelle Obama's speech in support of Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire and, immediately afterward, Donald Trump's speech in support of himself in Palm Beach. The First Lady is hurt by the reality that women are still discussed first and foremost based on attractiveness, coupled with the idea that there are powerful men who think they are entitled to indulge in whatever behavior they see fit with any woman they wish. To Donald Trump, Jessica Leeds’ allegation that he forced himself on her in an airplane and People magazine reporter Natasha Stoynoff's allegation that he assaulted her during an interview can be debunked, in part, by looking at them. Trump further stated that if the latter story had been true, Stoynoff would have mentioned it in her article, which instead detailed the loving union of Trump and his then-pregnant wife, Melania, on their first anniversary. Such a story, he continued, would have been a huge headline, given his celebrity status.
Two questions
Just listening to Trump for a few minutes makes it obvious that if the reporter had gone public right away, all hell would have broken loose against her. Whatever the reasons for the delay, I'm certainly not one to judge, given my silence in the face of a far less formidable man. Two questions come to mind. First, why are some Trump supporters so blasé about Trump's stated entitlement to touch a woman's private parts against her will? Second, why do women still feel that we need to keep silent when men cross the line?
To answer the first question, Trump supporters have cited Bill Clinton's antics with Monica Lewinsky and others—combined with Hillary Clinton's decision to stay in her marriage and alleged vengeful attitude towards the women involved—as equivalent to their candidate's bragging about putting his hand, unbidden, on a woman's vagina. The former president projects a lot more charm than the current candidate, but when Trump said that he'd engaged in lewd conversations with Clinton on the golf course, I think he was probably telling the truth. The thing is, Clinton was publicly lambasted for his transgressions, and seemed to show some sense of embarrassment. Trump, on the other hand, is shameless, limp apologies and recasting his comments as “locker room talk” notwithstanding. As for Hillary Clinton's attempts to discredit or bully the women who had dalliances with Bill, not cool, but not unusual. The person who has taken the vow is the one who has the responsibility to exercise restraint, but marrying someone usually implies at least some level of love, either past or present. Human nature includes lashing out at those we love, but it's also very human to make those we don't love the proxy targets of our anger. The bottom line is that a lot of women can understand why Hillary Clinton might try to discredit her husband's mistresses.
My second question ties in with Michelle Obama's eloquent speech, the transcript of which should become a part of the curriculum in middle schools, high schools and colleges throughout the nation, or maybe the world. Why do women, in this day and age, still have to feel constrained to keep quiet when men violate them? Even though I think of myself a feminist, I never considered publicly mentioning that Gunther Schuller had acted inappropriately until the Trump situation led me to write a Facebook post on my experience. One young woman read my post and commented about facing unwanted advances while in the military, then telling her story to superiors until someone listened. I applaud her. The difference, in my case, is that I didn't have to deal with Mr. Schuller on an ongoing basis. Still, I can't be certain I would have spoken out if he'd tried to kiss me again after engaging me to perform another concert. I'm ashamed to admit this.
Jessica Leeds said that she tolerated having her upper body touched, but drew the line when Donald Trump reached beneath her skirt. Kristin Anderson said that she fled from Trump when he reached beneath her underwear at a nightclub, but didn't say anything because it happened quickly, and she didn't know whom she would tell. While their decisions were undoubtedly influenced by the celebrity status that Trump touted as his ticket to molest at will, I think there may be a bigger issue involved.
What right do women believe we have to our bodies?
What right do women believe we have to our bodies, even now, even in America? In asking this, I'm reminded of Ta-Nehisi Coates' central theme in Between the World and Me; his book references the particular issues of being African-American, and I haven't missed the point, made by several pundits, that it took offenses against women of European descent to cause prominent Republicans to jump off the Trump bandwagon, even though their candidate had already insulted just about everybody else. Regardless, concern about the security of our bodies applies to all women, regardless of race. Colleges are currently addressing rape culture, but this is a very recent, and uneven, development. Women all over the world are still sold into sexual slavery. In cases of sexual assault between a man and a woman, the woman still bears the burden of proving herself “pure;” a male defendant who is sexually active, or even hyperactive, won't face the same level of scrutiny. We've come a long way, in some aspects, but we have a lot further to go before women will be given equal societal respect, except in the arena of parenting.
Accepting the unacceptable
Returning to the presidential campaign, I admit that Donald Trump's alleged sexual misconduct doesn't justify my shrug at Hillary Clinton's corruption. I think the reason one resonates more than the other is that I will never have to choose who gets access to my million dollar contracts, and neither will most other people. Then again, if the high school play is cast based on which kid the teacher/director likes better, that's corruption. If a policeman lets one person evade a ticket and writes up another for the same offense, that's corruption. We accept it because we feel we feel powerless to stop it. Similarly, we are taught that “boys will be boys,” that they have raging hormones which are triggered by any small display of female flesh (hence rules that prohibit high school girls from wearing tank tops with spaghetti straps), and that their drive to act on such things is something they shouldn't always be expected to control. Are we really powerless to stop this, though? If we feel that we are, does that excuse us from trying?
Both corruption and sexual assault have been around since the dawn of human history. The difference, I think, is that even though the end doesn't justify the means, what can be described as corruption at the government level can sometimes serve of a larger, even admirable, goal, as Hillary Clinton tried to suggest by alluding to Lincoln's machinations in trying to abolish slavery. Violating a woman's right to consent about the use of her own body has no goal other than the gratification of one person at the expense of another. Which is worse?