Speaking Truth to Power - Anita Hill [144]
The irony is that Thomas’ philosophy of rejecting the use of racism as an excuse was turned on its head as he used racism to escape responsibility for his own behavior. Clearly, both Thomas and Chavis have political enemies. Anyone who chooses to pursue the kinds of careers chosen by the two will undoubtedly make political enemies in the process. Clearly, both Thomas’ and Chavis’ enemies objected to positions each had taken. Some had done so on the record, others off the record. Nevertheless, these enemies should not be used as the scapegoats for gender subordination and illegal behavior engaged in by individuals.
In my effort to reconnect with the African American community I sought a different community than the one that rejected the significance of the experience of half its population. I wanted a community that would look at gender oppression as seriously as it looked for the political enemies behind a conspiracy to bring down a good man. I was not prepared to accept the fact that I could not have such a community. Within the African American community the discussion about gender-based exclusion and subordination is long overdue. Reactions to charges of sexual impropriety such as those of Thomas and Chavis threaten to postpone discussions of the subject indefinitely. Professor Emma Coleman Jordan recognizes a “maxim of African-American participation in public commentary: Never air your dirty linen in public.” Its violation carries with it a heavy penalty—a community shunning.
I searched for others who sought the same. I found several outspoken women who have shared their concerns about sexism in the community. Elaine Brown came very close to violating the maxim when she discussed the misogyny and gender bias prominent in the Black Panther Party of the 1960s and 1970s. Dr. Billy Avery has long spoken against the abuse of black women in their home, starting her campaign against this abuse in the black church. Myrlie Evers, for years a member of the NAACP national board, later its president, has spoken to the issue and urged the organization to address sexism within it. I once engaged in a discussion of gender inequity with some local leadership in an African Canadian community. The discussion was enlightening, lively, and compelling but drenched in pain. Example followed example. Earnest attempts to understand followed pained recollection. The Canadians made most of the contributions; I sat listening and intrigued. At the end one woman in the group told me that this was the first time that they had an open forum to discuss their feelings with the men in their community. They announced it as if they were describing breathing air into a portion of their lungs previously unused. I can only hope that the dialogue has continued.
One discussion does not a revolution or revelation make. The powerful charges of bringing down good men and bringing shame to the community go a long way to silence those who speak out. African American women are thus forced into a position of choosing between race and gender. When forced, we are likely to identify with race. Consequently, except for individual efforts the problems get little attention and no community discussion. Once we give up for political reasons the right to claim gender bias, the male perspective, whether right or wrong, becomes the black community perspective.
Consequently, all claims of bias and oppression lose some of their validity inside and outside the community. By raising questions of racism, Thomas and his supporters capitalized on this reality, counting on the community supporting a black man over a black woman. Thomas himself had counted on it when he used the “welfare queen” image of his sister to gain political points with the conservatives back in 1981. Ten years later the Republican senators and even David Brock could count on the community identifying with Thomas, notwithstanding their own use of racially laden stereotypes of black women, to support their charges of racism.