Krupa Shah
Editor in Chief
Twenty seven years ago a young walked into the Hearing Room of the Senate Judiciary Committee to testify against her harasser. Coincidentally, the same events unfolded in the hearings for Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. It was once Anita Hill and now its Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and both deserve to have their stories told.
In 1991, Anita Hill upended Clarence Thomas’s confirmation hearing. She accused him of sexually harassing her after she denied his previous advancements to date. Obviously, then Supreme Court-nominee Clarence Thomas vehemently denied the allegations stating, “ [this hearing is] a high-tech lynching for uppity Blacks,” referring to the idea that Hill’s purpose in testifying was to prevent him from entering a public position so she could further herself. These allegations were the first of their kind and left a deep mark on the confirmation hearings.
Sitting before and all white male panel of senators that made up the Senate Judiciary Committee, Anita Hill was grilled on her relationship with and the alleged actions of then Judge Clarence Thomas. Hill’s testimony alleges that Thomas sexually harassed her through discussion of sexual acts and other types of pornographic content, much of which was extremely salacious and was never deemed acceptable to discuss on the bench until now. Over and Over, she was, essentially, forced to repeat graphically, embarrassing details that would forever go down as one of the most brutal yet uncomfortable questioning in history. In the end, Clarence Thomas would be confirmed.
The echoes of Anita Hill’s testimony emanated from each of the words spoken by Dr. Ford in the September 27, 2018 hearing, proving that this hearing would be no different from the one that occured in 1991. Dr. Ford’s allegations of assault still caused shockwaves all throughout DC and the rest of country in terms of detailing Kavanaugh’s alleged actions towards her at that high school party 36 years ago. Furthermore, the account being detailed all these years later describes the “reluctance of someone to come forward demonstrates that even in the #MeToo era, it remains incredibly difficult to report harassment, abuse or assault by people in power,” explains Hill when discussing the parallels between the cases in 1991 and now.
The parallels between both of the cases are strikingly similar as both women are educators who accused people whom they had worked with and went a party with, respectively, as well as sitting before a predominantly white, male panel discussing the graphic details of each incident. Furthermore, both of their alleged perpetrators were eventually confirmed to the Supreme Court and have vehemently denied all of the allegations. However, this denial should not and does not discount both of these women’s stories.
