I am not holding myself out as a feminist blog opposed to sexual harassment and then running out to get my picture made with Bill Clinton--if I did, I would see myself as the hypocrit I would rightly be.So what she's admitting is even though she is a forensic psychologist, she isn't opposed to sexual harassment (or doesn't care enough to actually do anything about this problem) and therefore can hang out, guilt-free, with men who have treated women in the way Bill Clinton has been accused of doing. She's saying there would be nothing wrong with her posing with former President Bill Clinton.
By this logic since I'm anti-rape and have taken action against rape, I can't have my picture taken with anyone who was ever accused of rape (with or without formal charges) or who was ever rumored to have committed rape but those who are apathetic at best about the issue of rape and violence against women can do so without criticism?
I never knew about this rule. So much for the idea of being able to hate the sin without hating the sinner.
According to Dr. Helen's logic we should elevate all those who don't give a damn above all those who care enough to speak out.
Dr. Helen's logic means that those who oppose illegal drugs can never meet with President George W. Bush since there have been people who said that he used cocaine at least once. If no charges are needed in Bill Clinton's case, they certainly can't be needed in W's case.
Using her own logic, if Dr. Helen would be willing to be photographed with our current president she must not be opposed to illegal drug use or else she is no different than Jessica at Feministing.
Technorati tags: rape crime politics sexual violence sexual assault feminism