The scope of this article is not to discuss whether these allegations or claims are merely political weapons in an effort to derail a politician’s ambitions. Rather, my focus is to use this scandal and the statements made by Cain and others in support of him to prove the ways in which our culture demeans women. This is a “wake up” message, in a way, using a contemporary, current event to explore the concept of what is known as “rape culture.” Sexual harassment, in its essence, is unwanted sexual advance (amongst other things) and is a form of violence most often committed against women.
Herman Cain has a documented history of sexual harassment. Despite his denial of particular instances or allegations, and whether we want to use terms such as claiming him as being found “guilty” versus merely stating that claims against him were substantiated, the bottom line is that payouts were made in an effort at reparations for women who sought restitution for Mr. Cain’s actions. This is undeniable, as the paperwork exists to prove it in a government agency. Whether some of the other allegations that have now surfaced are true remains to be seen. Thus, regardless of whether anyone who wishes to see Mr. Cain elected wants to admit to at least two documented instances, they remain viable proof of serious, founded, evidentiary-supported claims of sexual misconduct, which warranted settlement.
Political pundits discuss all of this with an air of detachment. Their focus is on whether Mr. Cain can “recover” from the political blow this information causes his campaign efforts. They compare the situation to that of allegations against Bill Clinton in his bid for the presidency. Republican or “right” leaning radio talk programs claim the media as biased as they helped the public overlook Mr. Clinton’s dalliances in favor of a Democratic president. What do his personal issues have to do with him serving as president? How did his treatment of employees have anything to do with the job of President of the United States? These were questions that were asked. The Right wants to have these same questions posed of their candidate, Herman Cain.
All of this proves the rape culture and a culture of violence against women in our society. That people would even ask about overlooking a man’s treatment of women in favor of his abilities to run the country proves that women are still second-class citizens. The good of the country comes before victimization of women. That political pundits would ignore the situation of sexual harassment and merely examine allegations of sexual harassment in terms of whether a candidate can recover from them, also points toward an acceptance of this kind of behavior. The media supporting a Republican agenda and candidate is correct in asking how the leftist, Democratic-learning media can cry foul about Mr. Cain’s past while glossing over that of Mr. Clinton.
The ubiquity of acceptance of sexual harassment was driven home to me not by these political news reports, but rather by an advertisement for a well-known coffee and donut shop, especially in New England. A recent radio spot raves about the company’s hot chocolate as New England heads into winter. It uses subtle behavior that could be construed as sexual harassment to sell its wares. The commercial on the radio begins with a male, who we are to assume is a co-worker in the way the ad is set up, who asks something to the effect of, “Do you want to get cozy?” A female responds in a surprised and mock-offended manner. The male voice then claims he means with a cup of hot chocolate, professing his innocence in asking the question. The female acquiesces and responds affirmatively that coziness with hot chocolate is acceptable to her. The commercial ends with the male voice then asking the female to dinner, which she declines. This indicates innuendo, which, in a workplace, could be construed as sexual harassment, or at the least the beginning of what might come to be unwanted advances by a coworker upon another coworker. That we use innuendo that is linked to workplace behavior of a sexual nature in our advertising proves our acceptance of this kind of flirtatiousness that can lead to or be misconstrued as sexual harassment, depending on individual circumstances and specific situations. It is no wonder that Mrs. Cain can hear her husband make jokes about Anita Hill in response to the surfacing of his history of sexual harassment and still claim her husband incapable of such acts, as they would indicate disrespect for women, which she does not find within his character. It seems that if we continue to embrace or ignore behaviors that are related to violence or demeaning acts toward women in our candidates for president, and we use sexual innuendo in the workplace to sell hot chocolate, we cannot escape the rape culture in which we live.
As a parting thought, what if Herman Cain was purported to have said exactly what the male voice in the radio ad said to a coworker? We would deem the behavior reprehensible? Yet, do we even truly hear this same kind of thing when advertisements come on the radio, on television or in print? Do we recognize what we’d determine as offensive and dismissive toward women when it is part of advertising? It seems we only care when it can be helpful or harmful to the political candidate of our choice. These all serve as incidences of our rape culture, our society that is dismissive of women, especially where the needs of advertising or running the government are concerned.
No comments:
Post a Comment