Feminists accused of `double standards' in Lewinsky affair

Feminists and women's groups are coming under fire for their reticence over the Monica Lewinsky affair in contrast to their outspokenness…

Feminists and women's groups are coming under fire for their reticence over the Monica Lewinsky affair in contrast to their outspokenness about earlier sex scandals involving political figures. They are being accused of "double standards".

The critics charge the feminists with sparing President Clinton because he has been such an advocate of women's causes, such as abortion rights, childcare and affirmative action. Yet it is recalled that when another politician who espoused women's issues, Senator Bob Packwood, a Republican, was accused of sexual harassment, the feminist organisations denounced him and he was forced to resign.

It is also recalled how feminists sprang to the defence of Anita Hill when she was attacked for accusing her former boss, Clarence Thomas, of sexual harassment. The charges emerged when he was nominated by President Bush to become a Supreme Court justice.

Now when Monica Lewinsky is being dismissed by anonymous White House sources as "flighty, flirtatious, prone to exaggeration", the critics ask, why don't the feminists spring to her defence? They recall a similar silence when supporters of Mr Clinton smeared Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones when their revelations threatened his political career.

READ MORE

Maureen Dowd writes ironically in her New York Times column: "Ms Lewinsky must die so that the women of America can have better childcare, longer maternity stays, toll-free domestic violence hotlines and bustling mutual funds."

This might explain why it is not just feminist groups who are giving Mr Clinton the benefit of the doubt over charges that he had sex with Ms Lewinsky when she was a 21-year-old intern in the White House and later urged her to deny this under oath. Opinion polls show that women generally are more supportive of Mr Clinton than men and prepared to overlook his behaviour with Ms Lewinsky even if proved true.

"We would have expected women's support to possibly fold on this issue because of the sexual power dynamic in a relationship between the president and a 21year-old woman," says Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Centre, one of the main polling organisations. "But the counter-dynamic is women really like Clinton. He's less important as an individual than as a leader for women."

The president of the National Abortion Rights Action League, Ms Kate Michelman, when asked for her views on the present controversy, said: "At a time when there are so many rumours and innuendoes flying around, it would be inappropriate to make a comment."

At the time allegations of harassing female staff were made against Senator Packwood in 1993, Ms Michelman said such actions were "an egregious violation of his commitment to women's issues".

Ms Patricia Ireland, president of the National Organisation for Women (NOW), said then that whatever good Mr Packwood had done for women's causes, continuing to support him would inevitably raise the issue, "Can we be bought? And if so, how cheap?"

Ms Ireland says that this time there was a consensus among NOW staff that "we wanted to put out a clear statement of our belief that it would be a gross misuse of power for the president of the United States to have a sexual relationship with a White House employee or intern." NOW considered having its interns marching on the White House with placards but that was rejected because it would suggest "we were taking a side, attacking Clinton, as opposed to making a general statement."

Instead it was agreed to urge White House officials, including the president, to sign a pledge "to reject sexually intimate relations with employees and volunteers". The pledge has now been circulated to the White House staff.

Feminist writer and founder of Ms magazine, Gloria Steinem, is quoted as acknowledging a "suspicious power difference" between a middle-aged president and a young White House intern. But 21-year-olds were old enough to "say yes or no".

Ms Steinem says she found it significant that Mr Clinton had not been accused of coercing anyone into a sexual encounter and that not even Paula Jones claimed that Mr Clinton forced himself on her. "He takes no for an answer."

Democratic women politicians who have been strong supporters of President Clinton are now embarrassed but trying to stay loyal.

Senator Patty Murray, who ran for office, partly over outrage at how the Senate seemed to be dismissing Anita Hill's charges, says she is reserving judgement on the Monica Lewinsky allegations. At the time of the Senator Packwood case, Ms Murray said, "I really believe our highest elected officials should set the standard of the nation."

Senator Barbara Boxer, a Democrat from California who was also outspoken at the time of the Thomas and Packwood affairs, says about the Lewinsky allegations: "What is important for the American people to know is that there is a process in place to deal with these allegations."

The writer, Camille Paglia, who describes herself as "the only leading feminist to have believed Paula Jones from the start", has a possibly unique view. She told the Web magazine, Salon: "I don't want a cold fish. I want someone in the White House who would love to have sex with 10 different people in three days."