Sex and Justice Response (Anne)

Anne Hruska
U.S. Gov
Ms. Gordon
Sex & Justice response
March 2, 2016

1. In Clarence Thomas’ case, he used the term “high-tech lynching” in order to make himself seem like the victim of this particular circumstance, both of the trial, and under the jurisdiction of the Congressional Committee. He is a black man, and in society black males have very strong stereotypes surrounding them; furthermore, much of what Anita Hill testified that Thomas said was in line with certain stereotypes associated with black men. He took this chance to relate what Hill said to the lynchings that happened to blacks, and used the term “high-tech lynching” to relay the magnitude of the reputational sabotage he felt Hill’s claims did to him. However, his attempt to drag his race into an issue that was between a black man and black woman was noted on the committee. One member even mentioned that he did not wish to hear any more comments regarding racism as it was between the two of them, so apparently there would be no bias present. On Thomas’ side of the argument, he was furiously trying to defend himself, he had his reputation at stake which is enough to worry anyone, regardless of position. Then, he proceeded to deny all testimonies of Ms. Hill and tried to dodge all the allegations by simply denying them. On Hill’s side, she came out only after a friend urged her and she testified to what she believed happened. This lead to the whole trial essentially being an argument based on who the committee would've chosen to believe, there was very little undisputed evidence that was being entered and the majority of each person’s testimonies being hearsay. The committee is made up of humans, humans who have biases and cannot make every decision equitably. Not only this, but the entire committee was composed of white males so they sided with most of Thomas’ views because they were viewing it through professional male eyes; while I find it much easier to side with Anita Hill, as she is a woman and in this case the victim. Though the final vote was rather close, I still believe the reason that Thomas prevailed was because of the personal bias among committee members.

2. I think that the two cases certainly share some similarities but should be looked upon as issues of very different natures. The largest and most prominent connection between the two is the impact that the allegations had on each person's personal, work, and social lives. In the case of Clarence Thomas, he had so much on the line including all of his years of schooling, as well as his spot on the supreme court which seems to be enough for anyone to want to preserve their spotless reputation. However, in 1950 the Communist hearing, which was held by senator Joseph McCarthy, was responsible for blaming roughly 200 of the U.S. government as spies. This had a very long lasting effect on the reputations of many of these government workers and seemed like more of an attack on the members of government from McCarthy, as opposed to Anita Hill’s cry for help.