Is it sexist to see a common thread among third-wave feminists in that they feel a desire to scold others? Even when they compliment someone, they have to scold. And so Jill Filipovic, who has a permanent seat on the Feminist Rules Committee, can’t quite bring herself to show appreciation toward Stormy Daniels without Gertruding her disapproval.
Let’s take a moment for Stormy Daniels.
How this sentence got past the NY Times editors is beyond me. Take a moment to . . . think about, express appreciation to, condemn, what? Four paragraphs later, Filipovic gets to her moment for Stormy.
Which is why there is so much power in the fact that Ms. Daniels does not believe her job or her involvement with Mr. Trump or the payoff is her shame to carry. She wants him held accountable, and the justice system is actually stepping in. She is refusing to slink away, despite being paid to do exactly that in a pattern we’ve seen too many times from influential men seeking to maintain their dominance and avoid responsibility.
Is Stormy Daniel’s a hero? Let’s take stock. She chose to take a payoff to be silent. She took the money. She violated her agreement. She kept the money. Sure, Filipovic and many others kvel over her revelations, but do heroes keep their promises or dishonor them and keep the money?
So the obvious response from the grinning matinet, Rudy Giuliani, is that Stormy is a porn actress, and who you gonna believe?
Rudy Giuliani, one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, said in June that although he respects “all human beings,” Ms. Daniels is apparently one exception: “I don’t respect a porn star the way I respect a career woman, or a woman of substance, or a woman who has great respect for herself as a woman, and as a person,” he said. “And isn’t going to sell her body for sexual exploitation. So, Stormy, you want to bring a case? Let me cross-examine you.”
There should be no surprise that Rudy’s going after her virtue. Rudy made a smart move taking the prosecution path, as he’s truly awful as a defense lawyer. And frankly, I bet Stormy would kick Rudy’s butt on cross. Prosecutors do direct, not cross. They suck at cross.
But the crux of Rudy’s gambit is to attack Stormy for being a sex worker. It’s icky. It’s wrong. It’s dirty. What type of person would demean herself by selling her body for sexual exploitation? That would be a person who, after as much contemplation as necessary, decides to do so. It violates your sense or propriety, morality? Who cares? Well, Filipovic does.
The threat is that Mr. Giuliani would do to Ms. Daniels what lawyers have done for centuries to imperfect women (and in particular, rape victims): Humiliate them on the witness stand by suggesting their sexual histories render their testimony unreliable and their credibility questionable.
See what she did there? Much as Filipovic is happy to accept Stormy’s choice to violate her nondisclosure agreement, she just can’t bring herself to accept Stormy’s choice to be a porn star. Stormy Daniels is an “imperfect woman.” Any woman who doesn’t adhere to the Rules Committee’s dictates of how a perfect woman should conduct herself is imperfect, and sex work is totally unacceptable.* It’s not that she won’t happily accept the benefit Stormy brings to her world, but that in her dark heart, Filipovic is standing next to Rudy at the stocks in the village green, scolding Stormy over her “imperfections.”
Is Stormy Daniels “imperfect”? Aren’t we all? But the implicit scolding of the whore by the shrew is only an “issue” if you disavow a person’s agency to make whatever decisions they believe right for them. So Stormy chose sex work. Who is Filipovic to condemn her for it? Well, she is a permanent member of the Rules Committee, so judging others harshly for failure to behave in ways that don’t make her sniffle is what she does best.
*Maggie McNeill twitted this old Filipovic link, but Maggie is the antithesis of sex scolds like Filipovic. Ask Maggie if she’s “imperfect,” then run as fast as you can before she rips you a well-deserved new one.
Short Take: An Imperfect Storm curated from Simple Justice
No comments:
Post a Comment