What do you think?
Rate this book
Reckoning: The Epic Battle Against Sexual Abuse and Harassment
Linda Hirshman, acclaimed historian of social movements, delivers the sweeping story of the struggle leading up to #MeToo and beyond: from the first tales of workplace harassment percolating to the surface in the 1970s, to the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal—when liberal women largely forgave Clinton, giving men a free pass for two decades. Many liberals even resisted the movement to end rape on campus.
Nevertheless, legal, political, and cultural efforts, often spearheaded by women of color, were quietly paving the way for the take-down of abusers and harassers. Reckoning delivers the stirring tale of a movement catching fire as pioneering women in the media exposed the Harvey Weinsteins of the world and flooded the political landscape. This is a revelatory, essential social history.
Nevertheless, legal, political, and cultural efforts, often spearheaded by women of color, were quietly paving the way for the take-down of abusers and harassers. Reckoning delivers the stirring tale of a movement catching fire as pioneering women in the media exposed the Harvey Weinsteins of the world and flooded the political landscape. This is a revelatory, essential social history.
336 pages, Hardcover
First published June 11, 2019
19 people are currently reading
744 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
January 29, 2021
Hirshman charts the history of feminism and the fight against sexual harassment from the mid-20th century to the #MeToo movement. Being reasonably well versed in events from Anita Hill's story and the whole Clinton-Lewinsky mess on and into the present day, I found the early parts of the book the most interesting. The author gives a solid overview and touches on numerous aspects, but seems rather dismissive of and condescending towards anyone whose opinions she doesn't embrace. Of course, in her eyes I'm presumably a terrible feminist as I don't agree with every view espoused by her and her precious Catharine MacKinnon (evidently the be-all and end-all of feminist ideology in Hirshman's eyes)...
August 12, 2019
This book is about the history of legal fights against sexual abuse and harassment. It starts in the fifties and builds up to the present-day with the #MeToo movement. I thought it was a good topic for a book and I got a good overview of the legal battles to make sexual harassment in the workplace something that could be litigated against and the process of putting in place legal protections against sexual harassment and abuse. It is mind-boggling that asking someone for sex at work was once seen as perfectly ok and firing someone because they wouldn't have sex with you was not illegal. Hirschman is also not afraid to call out abuses of power such as Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky and to point out how the women's movement has long had this issue of pitting "sex positivity" against abusive practices such as those present in a lot of pornography. She brings up Catharine MacKinnon many times, to the extent that I wondered if she had written a biography of MacKinnon or was planning one. I did appreciate learning about MacKinnon, as she seems to be more radical than Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her take on gender discrimination and sexual abuse seemed like something I should look into more.
This was definitely a good book to get an idea of the history of sexual harassment lawsuits and shed some light on what has changed and what has remained the same. I think there is still a long way to go in achieving equality in the workplace and sexual harassment is one of those large issues that is finally being talked about openly now.
This was definitely a good book to get an idea of the history of sexual harassment lawsuits and shed some light on what has changed and what has remained the same. I think there is still a long way to go in achieving equality in the workplace and sexual harassment is one of those large issues that is finally being talked about openly now.
July 21, 2019
This book is so bad! Her conviction that Catharine MacKinnon is the driving force of all feminism gives her a skewed perspective, where she measures everyone's rightness by whether or not they've read MacKinnon, or talked to her, and where she conflates pornography with sexual harassment. (She also bizarrely starts her story with Ted Kennedy at Chappaquiddick. I don't think I'd categorize leaving someone to die as sexual harassment exactly.) I highlighted one egregious passage in which she criticizes sex-positivity:
Among other flaws, she is catty in her descriptions of women she doesn't like and judges opinions she doesn't agree with to be "word salad." At one point she quotes from an American Legal Institute report that she considers to be "word salad," but which seemed reasonable and clear to me, and then contrasts it to her hero Catherine MacKinnon, who was incoherent. Lastly, the book doesn't seem to tell a story. I understand that progress in American attitudes towards sexual harassment has not been linear, but this feels like a string of anecdotes without a focus. About 75% of the book is about political figures accused of harassment, with Harvey Weinstein thrown in the middle. I'd like to see some interpretive insight, like has there overall been progress? Is Trump's election a backlash, or a sign of a divided country, or what? Basically I persisted in reading just to learn some bits of history.
The sexual revolution, which had vanquished the antipornography movement ten years before, was clearly in ascendance. Despite the role workplace harassment and pornography played in ... Anita Hill's ordeal with Clarence Thomas, most people still felt America could accommodate both political gender equality and sexual libertinism in one culture"(p.97) I can't imagine what she thinks society's approach to sex ought to be. Don't do it? Everyone be gay?
Among other flaws, she is catty in her descriptions of women she doesn't like and judges opinions she doesn't agree with to be "word salad." At one point she quotes from an American Legal Institute report that she considers to be "word salad," but which seemed reasonable and clear to me, and then contrasts it to her hero Catherine MacKinnon, who was incoherent. Lastly, the book doesn't seem to tell a story. I understand that progress in American attitudes towards sexual harassment has not been linear, but this feels like a string of anecdotes without a focus. About 75% of the book is about political figures accused of harassment, with Harvey Weinstein thrown in the middle. I'd like to see some interpretive insight, like has there overall been progress? Is Trump's election a backlash, or a sign of a divided country, or what? Basically I persisted in reading just to learn some bits of history.
March 23, 2021
Reckoning: The Epic Battle Against Sexual Abuse and Harassment
By Linda Hirshman
- [ ] The history of feminism and the different waves
- [ ] Bill Clinton and women splitting over his affair
- [ ] Some women that don’t support Hillary
- [ ] Reagan starting splitting the parties between men and women
- [ ] The ever dangerous white women
- [ ] Ted Kennedy and Chapaquidick
- [ ] He challenged Carter in ’80 but lost in Iowa because women came out against him for Chapaquidck, his womanizing, and supporting women’s policies but then not having prominent women high in his staff. He was taken down in an early ‘me too’ movement
- [ ] The democrats lost the White House and the republicans rapidly went after women’s rights, could Teddy have beaten Reagan in ’80? He might have had an even better chance in ’84
- [ ] I hope I take plenty of notes during this book
- [ ] The term sexual harassment was not coined until the 1970’s when Lynn Farley and consciousness raising group put a name to it. Putting a name to things, tends to be a watershed moment
Have I ever sexually harassed someone or made someone uncomfortable?
I believe I have
- [ ] Power dynamics are a huge factor, who is the boss, who is in charge, what they say and do
Chapter 2 - reread this chapter
- [ ] The legal case
- [ ] Powerful RBG
- [ ] The Equal Rights Amendment
- [ ] At first pregnancy was separate from gender, it was disability and not protected
- [ ] Treating people the same is not equal - white men were the standard
- [ ] A women could be fired because she did not have sex with her boss because it did not have to do with gender thus was not protected and sexual harassment protections had not built. She could be fired because it was about sex, the connection between sexual harassment and gender was being established and had not been at this point
- [ ] Bringing sex into the work place - reread this
- [ ] A man was seeking sex at was considered personal not sexual and was creating a homely atmosphere - but this had to change, it had to be established that bringing sex to work was interfering at work, was being manifested at work, was position of power, employees were being sucked in, and impacting work - manifesting personal behavior in the workplace - sex in the work place
- [ ] Sexual harassment has to do with gender because it is a byproduct of men viewing women as inferior and thus is discriminatory. Women working jobs that are of lower status to that of men
- [ ] Inequality of women has to do with sexual harassment because it demeans women, harms them, diminishes them, pushes them down, thus it is discriminatory
- [ ] Does making a pass amount to sex discrimination - as long as the role has to do with sex
- [ ] An illegal abuse of power over a protected class. Once sex in the work place was established as a potential abuse of power, in which only and all women were vulnerable, it shifted the frame work - thus sex was included in the ERA
- [ ] However companies were protected - they could protect themselves from liability by hosting a sexual harassment policy, creating a workable method for reporting, and protecting the reporters identity
- [ ] Intersectionality
- [ ] Barnes and Burke
- [ ] Chapter 3
- [ ] Your body is your own
- [ ] How do human beings interact in the realm of sex under the conditions of inequality?
- [ ] Sexual harassment is about unequal power, abusers extract sex for the arousal and affirmation of experiencing their power and dominate actors extract sex for a reward for their dominance
- [ ] Sexual harassment is fundamentally a physical act?
- [ ] Establishing that your body is your own
- [ ] Hobbes - the state - consent before the state
- [ ] The inequality of bargaining power in women’s lives
- [ ] You cannot separate sex from power
- [ ] Sex from the personal, private, to political
Chapter 4:
- [ ] EEOC
- [ ] Hostile work environment
- [ ] Sexual harassment that creates a hostile work environment, violates the ERA - Mariter V Vincent - 1986
- [ ] It protects the employer from the actions of the employee - it was helpful but a dangerous precedent
- [ ] The burden of stopping sexual harassment was placed on those with the least power - women and minorities
- [ ] Reagan shifts the court right
- [ ] The power of women of color
- [ ] Formal antiharessment policies
- [ ] Anti harassment training
- [ ] Miscellaneous preventive measures - such as posting the policies
- [ ] These policies and rulings did not cut down on harassment. Women continued to cower and be in fear. HR departments were there to protect the company, not the employee
- [ ] The court was siding with women but not supporting them - Sandra Day O’Conner was writing these opinions
- [ ] They were working with ‘sever and pervasive behavior’ it was too broad and too specific
Chapter 5: Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas
- [ ] Clarence Thomas has never wanted to be defined by race
- [ ] Thomas was chairman of the EEOC and moved it to the right
- [ ] Politicians care about sexual harassment when it’s the other party and defensive when it’s their own
- [ ] Biden was a centrist
- [ ] Anita Hill worked for Thomas for two years
- [ ] Ted Kennedy was a notorious womanizer
- [ ] Biden’s early campaigns were run by his sister, his sister took care of his kids after his first wife died and he was a freshman senator, he has been backed/propped up by powerful women his entire life
- [ ] Because she is a women it was a risk even for Nina Totenburg to be the journalist to break Anita Hill
- [ ] The scorched earth tactics of the right
- [ ] A 1994 book written by two female journalists put to rest the facts - Clarence Thomas was lying and Anita Hill was telling the truth
Chapter 6: Bill Clinton, Monica Lewinsky, and feminism’s swerve
- [ ] The claim that adulatory is private and only to be addressed by the spouse
- [ ] The many counts of harassment, rape, and adulatory against Bill
- [ ] It was perjury that got Clinton
- [ ] He was passing pro women legislation and putting women in prominent positions. Women’s rights are human rights and human rights are women’s right
- [ ] Hillary protected Bill from accusations
- [ ] Monica told friends and family about her affair
- [ ] Bill is a creep. The more I learn about the guy the worse it gets. I do not like him
- [ ] The defamation of Monica by Democrats was similar to that of Anita Hill by Republicans
- [ ] It was about power, Bill manipulated her, preyed on a vulnerable young women, strung her along, and was a powerful man taking advantage of a young women
- [ ] Monica didn’t do herself any favors
- [ ] Bill was still the best president for women’s rights, was the the price of him worth the cost?
- [ ] Maria - ‘I was a freshmen in college in 1992 at one of the seven sisters. I saw the right immediately go after and destroy Hillary because they saw her as a threat and knew she would run for president. I then saw the left take on the same tactics against and talking points against Hillary. I saw it happen again to Warren. It was a formative experience in my life. I was a huge Hillary supporter’ - wow, I want to follow up with her about this
Chapter 7
- [ ] The feminist movement was attacked from the beginning
- [ ] It was fractured by itself
- [ ] Third wave feminism opened up feminism to all
- [ ] The feminist bargain with Clinton
- [ ] My generation does not talk about feminism
- [ ] Feminism - I don’t know how to define it - I want to learn more
- [ ] The Clinton affair put Hillary in the senate but put Bush in the White House
- [ ] Powerful Hillary Clinton
- [ ] Gore backed Clinton and cost him 3-4% of the vote - it’s unclear is Clinton hurt or would have helped Gore. It is clear - no Monica, Gore would have won
- [ ] On his day in office Bush instituted the gag rule, he went on to pass a slew of antifemale policies
- [ ] Bush put Alito on the court and anti women judges
- [ ] Fox News was launched in the heat of the Monica scandal
- [ ] Harry Reid encouraged Obama to run for president
- [ ] Many insiders in Washington did not back Hillary in 2008 because of the continued rumors of Bill’s affairs and they did not want another cycle of Clinton sex scandals
- [ ] Young feminists voted for Obama. Hillary’s first impression to many of them was defending Bill in 1992
- [ ] Maddow and other prominent women rose in 2008
- [ ] Obama employed only a slightly higher number of prominent women than Bill did, 20 years before
Chapter 8: feminism reborn, online, on campus, 2003-2011
- [ ] Feminist/female blogs
- [ ] Jezabel, Gawker, Salon, Angry Black Bitch, etc
- [ ] Blogs going viral
- [ ] Shame hates light, shining a light on the undiscussed issues
- [ ] Investigative journalism
Campus issues
- [ ] A lot of the movement started at UNC in 2011-2013 - I did not know this - have I been living under a rock, naive, ignorant, or was it not reported
- [ ] Women across the country connecting on social media and sharing their experiences
- [ ] Title 9 - any educational institution that receives federal money has to have policies that protect against sexual assault - universities were not doing enough, they were challenged and sued
- [ ] The level of debate and awareness was raised
- [ ] The women that carried her mattress around for a semester because her rapist was still at the university
- [ ] Date rape - it was hard to prove in court/convince a jury - this idea has changed
- [ ] Affirmative consent - what is it, why, the changing nature of consent - these conversations were huge for me
- [ ] Powerful women from my generation, making changes - I saw this movement take place - I personally feel that things have changed for the positive
- [ ] What is consent and what is the legal definition- verbal, nonverbal, physical?
- [ ] Subjective or objective consent
- [ ] Just like in the early years of the ALI nowhere was there a reliable political constituency for advocating for equalizing women’s status for sex
- [ ] The powerful American Law Institute. a professional legal organization - taken down?
- [ ] The debate over rape law
- [ ] Resistance, verbal, nonverbal, continuous, use of no etc
- [ ] Consent - acquiescence to power
- [ ] Enthusiastic consent
Chapter 9: Trump, Ailes, and the GOP
- [ ] Meghan Kelly challenges Trump on his treatment of women at the first debate, his response - I say what I say, our country is too PC, deal with it
- [ ] The GOP is now allowed to openly antagonize women instead of hiding it behind traditional values and Puritanism
- [ ] Then Trump really starts to go after women
- [ ] Kelly went to Trump Tower an praised her captor
- [ ] Fox News, Gretchen Carlson, Bill O’Riley, Trump, Roger Ailes, Meghan Kelly
- [ ] Gretchen Carlson started recording all of her conversations with Roger Ailes - this was a turning point moment in the movement
- [ ] Carlson was not typical Fox News arm candy
- [ ] She hired a lawyer, a PR firm, and took down Ailes
- [ ] Trump and grab them by the pussy
- [ ] His numbers basically stayed the same after the tape, his campaign was not effected by it. A few days later when challenged about it at the debate, he had Paula Jones in the audience
- [ ] 47% of white women - 24 million people, voted for Trump in 2016
Chapter 10: the women’s March
- [ ] A million women in DC, 4 million women across the country - over 1% of the nation
- [ ] Women ran for office
Chapter 11: Weinstein
- [ ] The power of investigative journalism
- [ ] Taking down Bill O’Reily
- [ ] Taking down Weinstein
- [ ] This book is filled with the power and detail of investigative journalism. Journalism is the 4th check on on power
- [ ] The whole system is designed to protect abusers
- [ ] Much of this chapter I learned in Ronan’s book
Chapter 12: me too
- [ ] Movement started by women of color
- [ ] Hashtag activism
- [ ] Good for sharing stories
- [ ] In the first month 71 men were taken down, in the next few months 417 prominent men with sanctioned
- [ ] Al Frakien - I have heard different things about the legitimacy of him, but the book says there were numerous allegations
- [ ] Democrats could no longer take women for granted or brush them aside like the GOP had
- [ ] Kamala Harris replaced Fraken on the judiciary committee
- [ ] Months later liberals were still upset at Fraken being pushed out, I am one of them. I am part of the problem
- [ ] Yes all women - times up
- [ ] Legal defense fund
- [ ] 42% of women in fast food have been harassed and 31% faced retaliation
- [ ] Times up funds the fast food workers suing Macdonalds for sexual harassment
Chapter 13: a year of reckoning, 2018
- [ ] Kavenaugh
- [ ] Judicial, political, air war
- [ ] Legal, electoral, cultural - waged for 50 years
- [ ] Legal - SCOUTUS, the federalist society, senate + White House = court
- [ ] She wanted did not want to be identified
- [ ] Ryan Grim helped break the story
- [ ] The 50 legal battle
- [ ] Susan Collins and white women again supporting the patriarchy
- [ ] This was the worst time of Trump
- [ ] Trump’s treatment of Kelly allowed this
- [ ] The electoral/the political:
- [ ] The squad
- [ ] 1992 - double women in the house, 5 female senators
- [ ] Emily Doe’s statement - wow, read it
- [ ] The recalling of Brock Turner’s judge
- [ ] The campaign was a model of what women can do when utilizing their political power
- [ ] 2.5 - electoral
- [ ] 1994 republican wave after women in 92
- [ ] The gop has become the party of white men
- [ ] Women come to the Democratic Party, including white women
- [ ] Women take power across the board
- [ ] 22 of the 43 house flipped Democratic seats were by women
- [ ] Intersectionality - squad
- [ ] Part 3: hearts and minds
- [ ] The centuries old cultural change
- [ ] The entire movement
- [ ] The hostile work places, sexual harassment, masculinity, absurdity that Hollywood shows - it has impacted me and I wonder if I act because of it
- [ ] ‘It is true that a women’s work is never done but after an extraordinary 50 year battle, women have earned an understand, their legal, political, and cultural right NOT to SUFFER SEXUAL ABUSE & SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE WORK PLACE OR ANYPLACE’
By Linda Hirshman
- [ ] The history of feminism and the different waves
- [ ] Bill Clinton and women splitting over his affair
- [ ] Some women that don’t support Hillary
- [ ] Reagan starting splitting the parties between men and women
- [ ] The ever dangerous white women
- [ ] Ted Kennedy and Chapaquidick
- [ ] He challenged Carter in ’80 but lost in Iowa because women came out against him for Chapaquidck, his womanizing, and supporting women’s policies but then not having prominent women high in his staff. He was taken down in an early ‘me too’ movement
- [ ] The democrats lost the White House and the republicans rapidly went after women’s rights, could Teddy have beaten Reagan in ’80? He might have had an even better chance in ’84
- [ ] I hope I take plenty of notes during this book
- [ ] The term sexual harassment was not coined until the 1970’s when Lynn Farley and consciousness raising group put a name to it. Putting a name to things, tends to be a watershed moment
Have I ever sexually harassed someone or made someone uncomfortable?
I believe I have
- [ ] Power dynamics are a huge factor, who is the boss, who is in charge, what they say and do
Chapter 2 - reread this chapter
- [ ] The legal case
- [ ] Powerful RBG
- [ ] The Equal Rights Amendment
- [ ] At first pregnancy was separate from gender, it was disability and not protected
- [ ] Treating people the same is not equal - white men were the standard
- [ ] A women could be fired because she did not have sex with her boss because it did not have to do with gender thus was not protected and sexual harassment protections had not built. She could be fired because it was about sex, the connection between sexual harassment and gender was being established and had not been at this point
- [ ] Bringing sex into the work place - reread this
- [ ] A man was seeking sex at was considered personal not sexual and was creating a homely atmosphere - but this had to change, it had to be established that bringing sex to work was interfering at work, was being manifested at work, was position of power, employees were being sucked in, and impacting work - manifesting personal behavior in the workplace - sex in the work place
- [ ] Sexual harassment has to do with gender because it is a byproduct of men viewing women as inferior and thus is discriminatory. Women working jobs that are of lower status to that of men
- [ ] Inequality of women has to do with sexual harassment because it demeans women, harms them, diminishes them, pushes them down, thus it is discriminatory
- [ ] Does making a pass amount to sex discrimination - as long as the role has to do with sex
- [ ] An illegal abuse of power over a protected class. Once sex in the work place was established as a potential abuse of power, in which only and all women were vulnerable, it shifted the frame work - thus sex was included in the ERA
- [ ] However companies were protected - they could protect themselves from liability by hosting a sexual harassment policy, creating a workable method for reporting, and protecting the reporters identity
- [ ] Intersectionality
- [ ] Barnes and Burke
- [ ] Chapter 3
- [ ] Your body is your own
- [ ] How do human beings interact in the realm of sex under the conditions of inequality?
- [ ] Sexual harassment is about unequal power, abusers extract sex for the arousal and affirmation of experiencing their power and dominate actors extract sex for a reward for their dominance
- [ ] Sexual harassment is fundamentally a physical act?
- [ ] Establishing that your body is your own
- [ ] Hobbes - the state - consent before the state
- [ ] The inequality of bargaining power in women’s lives
- [ ] You cannot separate sex from power
- [ ] Sex from the personal, private, to political
Chapter 4:
- [ ] EEOC
- [ ] Hostile work environment
- [ ] Sexual harassment that creates a hostile work environment, violates the ERA - Mariter V Vincent - 1986
- [ ] It protects the employer from the actions of the employee - it was helpful but a dangerous precedent
- [ ] The burden of stopping sexual harassment was placed on those with the least power - women and minorities
- [ ] Reagan shifts the court right
- [ ] The power of women of color
- [ ] Formal antiharessment policies
- [ ] Anti harassment training
- [ ] Miscellaneous preventive measures - such as posting the policies
- [ ] These policies and rulings did not cut down on harassment. Women continued to cower and be in fear. HR departments were there to protect the company, not the employee
- [ ] The court was siding with women but not supporting them - Sandra Day O’Conner was writing these opinions
- [ ] They were working with ‘sever and pervasive behavior’ it was too broad and too specific
Chapter 5: Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas
- [ ] Clarence Thomas has never wanted to be defined by race
- [ ] Thomas was chairman of the EEOC and moved it to the right
- [ ] Politicians care about sexual harassment when it’s the other party and defensive when it’s their own
- [ ] Biden was a centrist
- [ ] Anita Hill worked for Thomas for two years
- [ ] Ted Kennedy was a notorious womanizer
- [ ] Biden’s early campaigns were run by his sister, his sister took care of his kids after his first wife died and he was a freshman senator, he has been backed/propped up by powerful women his entire life
- [ ] Because she is a women it was a risk even for Nina Totenburg to be the journalist to break Anita Hill
- [ ] The scorched earth tactics of the right
- [ ] A 1994 book written by two female journalists put to rest the facts - Clarence Thomas was lying and Anita Hill was telling the truth
Chapter 6: Bill Clinton, Monica Lewinsky, and feminism’s swerve
- [ ] The claim that adulatory is private and only to be addressed by the spouse
- [ ] The many counts of harassment, rape, and adulatory against Bill
- [ ] It was perjury that got Clinton
- [ ] He was passing pro women legislation and putting women in prominent positions. Women’s rights are human rights and human rights are women’s right
- [ ] Hillary protected Bill from accusations
- [ ] Monica told friends and family about her affair
- [ ] Bill is a creep. The more I learn about the guy the worse it gets. I do not like him
- [ ] The defamation of Monica by Democrats was similar to that of Anita Hill by Republicans
- [ ] It was about power, Bill manipulated her, preyed on a vulnerable young women, strung her along, and was a powerful man taking advantage of a young women
- [ ] Monica didn’t do herself any favors
- [ ] Bill was still the best president for women’s rights, was the the price of him worth the cost?
- [ ] Maria - ‘I was a freshmen in college in 1992 at one of the seven sisters. I saw the right immediately go after and destroy Hillary because they saw her as a threat and knew she would run for president. I then saw the left take on the same tactics against and talking points against Hillary. I saw it happen again to Warren. It was a formative experience in my life. I was a huge Hillary supporter’ - wow, I want to follow up with her about this
Chapter 7
- [ ] The feminist movement was attacked from the beginning
- [ ] It was fractured by itself
- [ ] Third wave feminism opened up feminism to all
- [ ] The feminist bargain with Clinton
- [ ] My generation does not talk about feminism
- [ ] Feminism - I don’t know how to define it - I want to learn more
- [ ] The Clinton affair put Hillary in the senate but put Bush in the White House
- [ ] Powerful Hillary Clinton
- [ ] Gore backed Clinton and cost him 3-4% of the vote - it’s unclear is Clinton hurt or would have helped Gore. It is clear - no Monica, Gore would have won
- [ ] On his day in office Bush instituted the gag rule, he went on to pass a slew of antifemale policies
- [ ] Bush put Alito on the court and anti women judges
- [ ] Fox News was launched in the heat of the Monica scandal
- [ ] Harry Reid encouraged Obama to run for president
- [ ] Many insiders in Washington did not back Hillary in 2008 because of the continued rumors of Bill’s affairs and they did not want another cycle of Clinton sex scandals
- [ ] Young feminists voted for Obama. Hillary’s first impression to many of them was defending Bill in 1992
- [ ] Maddow and other prominent women rose in 2008
- [ ] Obama employed only a slightly higher number of prominent women than Bill did, 20 years before
Chapter 8: feminism reborn, online, on campus, 2003-2011
- [ ] Feminist/female blogs
- [ ] Jezabel, Gawker, Salon, Angry Black Bitch, etc
- [ ] Blogs going viral
- [ ] Shame hates light, shining a light on the undiscussed issues
- [ ] Investigative journalism
Campus issues
- [ ] A lot of the movement started at UNC in 2011-2013 - I did not know this - have I been living under a rock, naive, ignorant, or was it not reported
- [ ] Women across the country connecting on social media and sharing their experiences
- [ ] Title 9 - any educational institution that receives federal money has to have policies that protect against sexual assault - universities were not doing enough, they were challenged and sued
- [ ] The level of debate and awareness was raised
- [ ] The women that carried her mattress around for a semester because her rapist was still at the university
- [ ] Date rape - it was hard to prove in court/convince a jury - this idea has changed
- [ ] Affirmative consent - what is it, why, the changing nature of consent - these conversations were huge for me
- [ ] Powerful women from my generation, making changes - I saw this movement take place - I personally feel that things have changed for the positive
- [ ] What is consent and what is the legal definition- verbal, nonverbal, physical?
- [ ] Subjective or objective consent
- [ ] Just like in the early years of the ALI nowhere was there a reliable political constituency for advocating for equalizing women’s status for sex
- [ ] The powerful American Law Institute. a professional legal organization - taken down?
- [ ] The debate over rape law
- [ ] Resistance, verbal, nonverbal, continuous, use of no etc
- [ ] Consent - acquiescence to power
- [ ] Enthusiastic consent
Chapter 9: Trump, Ailes, and the GOP
- [ ] Meghan Kelly challenges Trump on his treatment of women at the first debate, his response - I say what I say, our country is too PC, deal with it
- [ ] The GOP is now allowed to openly antagonize women instead of hiding it behind traditional values and Puritanism
- [ ] Then Trump really starts to go after women
- [ ] Kelly went to Trump Tower an praised her captor
- [ ] Fox News, Gretchen Carlson, Bill O’Riley, Trump, Roger Ailes, Meghan Kelly
- [ ] Gretchen Carlson started recording all of her conversations with Roger Ailes - this was a turning point moment in the movement
- [ ] Carlson was not typical Fox News arm candy
- [ ] She hired a lawyer, a PR firm, and took down Ailes
- [ ] Trump and grab them by the pussy
- [ ] His numbers basically stayed the same after the tape, his campaign was not effected by it. A few days later when challenged about it at the debate, he had Paula Jones in the audience
- [ ] 47% of white women - 24 million people, voted for Trump in 2016
Chapter 10: the women’s March
- [ ] A million women in DC, 4 million women across the country - over 1% of the nation
- [ ] Women ran for office
Chapter 11: Weinstein
- [ ] The power of investigative journalism
- [ ] Taking down Bill O’Reily
- [ ] Taking down Weinstein
- [ ] This book is filled with the power and detail of investigative journalism. Journalism is the 4th check on on power
- [ ] The whole system is designed to protect abusers
- [ ] Much of this chapter I learned in Ronan’s book
Chapter 12: me too
- [ ] Movement started by women of color
- [ ] Hashtag activism
- [ ] Good for sharing stories
- [ ] In the first month 71 men were taken down, in the next few months 417 prominent men with sanctioned
- [ ] Al Frakien - I have heard different things about the legitimacy of him, but the book says there were numerous allegations
- [ ] Democrats could no longer take women for granted or brush them aside like the GOP had
- [ ] Kamala Harris replaced Fraken on the judiciary committee
- [ ] Months later liberals were still upset at Fraken being pushed out, I am one of them. I am part of the problem
- [ ] Yes all women - times up
- [ ] Legal defense fund
- [ ] 42% of women in fast food have been harassed and 31% faced retaliation
- [ ] Times up funds the fast food workers suing Macdonalds for sexual harassment
Chapter 13: a year of reckoning, 2018
- [ ] Kavenaugh
- [ ] Judicial, political, air war
- [ ] Legal, electoral, cultural - waged for 50 years
- [ ] Legal - SCOUTUS, the federalist society, senate + White House = court
- [ ] She wanted did not want to be identified
- [ ] Ryan Grim helped break the story
- [ ] The 50 legal battle
- [ ] Susan Collins and white women again supporting the patriarchy
- [ ] This was the worst time of Trump
- [ ] Trump’s treatment of Kelly allowed this
- [ ] The electoral/the political:
- [ ] The squad
- [ ] 1992 - double women in the house, 5 female senators
- [ ] Emily Doe’s statement - wow, read it
- [ ] The recalling of Brock Turner’s judge
- [ ] The campaign was a model of what women can do when utilizing their political power
- [ ] 2.5 - electoral
- [ ] 1994 republican wave after women in 92
- [ ] The gop has become the party of white men
- [ ] Women come to the Democratic Party, including white women
- [ ] Women take power across the board
- [ ] 22 of the 43 house flipped Democratic seats were by women
- [ ] Intersectionality - squad
- [ ] Part 3: hearts and minds
- [ ] The centuries old cultural change
- [ ] The entire movement
- [ ] The hostile work places, sexual harassment, masculinity, absurdity that Hollywood shows - it has impacted me and I wonder if I act because of it
- [ ] ‘It is true that a women’s work is never done but after an extraordinary 50 year battle, women have earned an understand, their legal, political, and cultural right NOT to SUFFER SEXUAL ABUSE & SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE WORK PLACE OR ANYPLACE’
July 31, 2019
This is a very good book about the history of the issues of sexual harassment and sexual abuse in modern America. Early feminists realized that sexual harassment could qualify as discrimination under the 1964 Civil Rights Act and fought to make it so. The film "9 to 5" helped raise popular awareness of the issue - and was based on interviews with real working women and their problems. There was a push against porn (for encouraging sexual violence) in the 1970s, but that was pushed back as an infringement upon free speech. Court cases helped ensure the notion of a hostile work environment as a civil rights abuse. The Supreme Court in Meritor v. Vinson concurred that sexual harrasment was a violation of rights. BUT the decision also declared that employers were not liable for the actions of the workers who engage in sexual harassment. There was still a murkiness of what was harassment and what wasn't.
Then came the Hill/Thomas hearings, exploding the issue into national prominence like nothing else. At the time, it was very much a senatorial old boys club, where a lot or background work was done in the Senate's steam room. Biden decided that questions on Thomas's personal life were out of bounds - while the GOP went into Hill's personal life. A second accuser, Angela Wright, had a corrobating witness but wasn't called on. This occurred as roughly the same time as the Kennedy family rape trial. Thomas called it a "high tech lynching." Polling by the summer of '92 showed that more believed Hill than Thomas (44/34) but that hadn't been the case during the hearings. A boom of women into Congress happened in 1992. Two writers wrote "Strange Justice" which provided a highly compelling case that Thomas was lying at the hearings.
However, instead of jumping from this strength, the feminist movement was sidetracked for much of the 1990s on sexual matters. This was because they backed Bill Clinton, who supported their policies but whose personal life was a disaster for them. HRC stood by her man when he was accused, and people attacked Lewinsky similar to how they treated Anita Hill. Gloria Stenium defended Clinton's behavior. Paul Jones raised her suit, but it was dismissed. Hirshman argues that the big threat to feminism wasn't opponents like Phyllis Scahfley but "frenemies" who agreed in principle with feminism but would negate it in practice.
Old feminist warhorses like Ms. magazine seemed passe, but there was talk of a "3rd wave" of feminism. Girle 'zines opened up the gates of feminism, as traditional feminism was seen as joyless. Lewinsky made HRC popular and a big Democratic fundraiser which helped them in 1998. BUT unhappy Clinton voters cost Gore in 2000, as "Clinton fatigue" was worth 3-4% of the vote. Lewinsky was also great for Fox News. Younger feminists first saw HRC as a "stand by your man" sort rally than a rallying figure.
Sassy magazine heralded a new age of feminist identity. You also had Bitch magazine, which also hit the internet. Websites like feministing and Angry Black Bitch gained attention, but the most notable one was Jezebel. Campus rape and date rape became key focuses of attention by the youth. Take Back the Night marches began in the 1970s, but by the 1990s it was more about looking at campus rapes thematically and systematically, not individually. The doctrine of affirmative consent gained steam. There was a backlash, especially when Rolling Stone magazine fucked up badly a story on campus rape at U-VA. (Hirshamn doesn't discuss it, but the Duke LaCrosse story would fit in here as well). Liberals and conservatives both took part in a backlash against affirmative consent.
Then comes the last few years. Trump kicked it off when he doubled down on criticism of Megyn Kelly - and got Megyn Kelly to back down. This signaled an aggressive attack on concern for women's rights. That said, Gretchen Carlson brought down Roger Ailes, in what's arguably the opening shot of #MeToo. The Access Hollywood tape incident occurred, and HRC didn't respond that effectively, in part because she was compromised by her defense of her husband over the years.
Over four million marched on Jan. 21, 2017 in 673 marches across the country. Emily's List and other groups used it as a staging ground to recruit candidates. Indivisible emerged. Bill O'Reilly was forced out. But then came the big stuff: Harvey Weinstein went down. And the #MeToo movement was galvanized by a tweet from Alyssa Milano. Bunches went out in a few months. It helped cause Al Franken and John Conyers to resign. No one wanted Bill Clinton to campaign with them in 2018. Democrats were purging themselves of sexual abusers. This helped them make a better case against Judge Roy Moore, and arguably even provided the margin of victory. Having Al Franken on the judiciary committee would hurt the Democrat's effectiveness dealing with Brett Kavanaugh. (OK, he passed anyway, but the Dems pressed it more than they would have, in part because unlike decades ago, women were now on the judiciary committee). The Brock Turner judge in CA lost a recall election, despite virtually the entire legal community (liberal and conservative) opposing the recall election. The Time's Up movement was founded, and helped provide a legal defense fund for workers, like McDonalds workers facing sexual discrimination. And scandals haven't gone away. The heads of NBC were questioned for why they killed Ronan Farrow's initial story on Harvey Weinstein - and the head of NBC news resigned in his own scandal. CBS's longtime overall boss Les Moonves went down as a creep. Initially, CBS said they'd fight the accusations, but more piled up and suddenly even his golden parachute was in question. It's worth noting it wasn't just sexual harassment that were among the things he did. He killed shows about women and shows run by women as part of his overall mindset. People like him or newsman Mark Halperin had long shaped news and national narratives, but they were among the people going down.
Then came the Hill/Thomas hearings, exploding the issue into national prominence like nothing else. At the time, it was very much a senatorial old boys club, where a lot or background work was done in the Senate's steam room. Biden decided that questions on Thomas's personal life were out of bounds - while the GOP went into Hill's personal life. A second accuser, Angela Wright, had a corrobating witness but wasn't called on. This occurred as roughly the same time as the Kennedy family rape trial. Thomas called it a "high tech lynching." Polling by the summer of '92 showed that more believed Hill than Thomas (44/34) but that hadn't been the case during the hearings. A boom of women into Congress happened in 1992. Two writers wrote "Strange Justice" which provided a highly compelling case that Thomas was lying at the hearings.
However, instead of jumping from this strength, the feminist movement was sidetracked for much of the 1990s on sexual matters. This was because they backed Bill Clinton, who supported their policies but whose personal life was a disaster for them. HRC stood by her man when he was accused, and people attacked Lewinsky similar to how they treated Anita Hill. Gloria Stenium defended Clinton's behavior. Paul Jones raised her suit, but it was dismissed. Hirshman argues that the big threat to feminism wasn't opponents like Phyllis Scahfley but "frenemies" who agreed in principle with feminism but would negate it in practice.
Old feminist warhorses like Ms. magazine seemed passe, but there was talk of a "3rd wave" of feminism. Girle 'zines opened up the gates of feminism, as traditional feminism was seen as joyless. Lewinsky made HRC popular and a big Democratic fundraiser which helped them in 1998. BUT unhappy Clinton voters cost Gore in 2000, as "Clinton fatigue" was worth 3-4% of the vote. Lewinsky was also great for Fox News. Younger feminists first saw HRC as a "stand by your man" sort rally than a rallying figure.
Sassy magazine heralded a new age of feminist identity. You also had Bitch magazine, which also hit the internet. Websites like feministing and Angry Black Bitch gained attention, but the most notable one was Jezebel. Campus rape and date rape became key focuses of attention by the youth. Take Back the Night marches began in the 1970s, but by the 1990s it was more about looking at campus rapes thematically and systematically, not individually. The doctrine of affirmative consent gained steam. There was a backlash, especially when Rolling Stone magazine fucked up badly a story on campus rape at U-VA. (Hirshamn doesn't discuss it, but the Duke LaCrosse story would fit in here as well). Liberals and conservatives both took part in a backlash against affirmative consent.
Then comes the last few years. Trump kicked it off when he doubled down on criticism of Megyn Kelly - and got Megyn Kelly to back down. This signaled an aggressive attack on concern for women's rights. That said, Gretchen Carlson brought down Roger Ailes, in what's arguably the opening shot of #MeToo. The Access Hollywood tape incident occurred, and HRC didn't respond that effectively, in part because she was compromised by her defense of her husband over the years.
Over four million marched on Jan. 21, 2017 in 673 marches across the country. Emily's List and other groups used it as a staging ground to recruit candidates. Indivisible emerged. Bill O'Reilly was forced out. But then came the big stuff: Harvey Weinstein went down. And the #MeToo movement was galvanized by a tweet from Alyssa Milano. Bunches went out in a few months. It helped cause Al Franken and John Conyers to resign. No one wanted Bill Clinton to campaign with them in 2018. Democrats were purging themselves of sexual abusers. This helped them make a better case against Judge Roy Moore, and arguably even provided the margin of victory. Having Al Franken on the judiciary committee would hurt the Democrat's effectiveness dealing with Brett Kavanaugh. (OK, he passed anyway, but the Dems pressed it more than they would have, in part because unlike decades ago, women were now on the judiciary committee). The Brock Turner judge in CA lost a recall election, despite virtually the entire legal community (liberal and conservative) opposing the recall election. The Time's Up movement was founded, and helped provide a legal defense fund for workers, like McDonalds workers facing sexual discrimination. And scandals haven't gone away. The heads of NBC were questioned for why they killed Ronan Farrow's initial story on Harvey Weinstein - and the head of NBC news resigned in his own scandal. CBS's longtime overall boss Les Moonves went down as a creep. Initially, CBS said they'd fight the accusations, but more piled up and suddenly even his golden parachute was in question. It's worth noting it wasn't just sexual harassment that were among the things he did. He killed shows about women and shows run by women as part of his overall mindset. People like him or newsman Mark Halperin had long shaped news and national narratives, but they were among the people going down.
June 6, 2019
This is a great historical background up what has led up to the #MeToo movement and why some folks, like black women have been in the struggle and engaged much longer and deeper than white married women. White married women have been a problem - that come to the workforce later and even 52% voted against their own interests in the presidential election.
Much to be done and after someone reads this, they will gain some wisdom as to how things must change.
Much to be done and after someone reads this, they will gain some wisdom as to how things must change.
August 11, 2021
I read most of Linda Hirshman’s book, Reckoning. It was not as good as Gretchen Carlson’s Be Fierce or my sister’s soon-to-be released book (I read the manuscript) on sexual harassment. Hirshman’s approach was to report about other high profile cases.
One of these cases struck me – the Clinton–Lewinsky affair – since I recall much of it when it occurred during the 1990s as I raised my family.
David Friend observed that “most Americans made their first real acquaintance with Bill Clinton when they watched him lying about sex on TV in 1992. The episode squarely presented the [Naughty Nineties] with a difficult problem. What to do about the old-fashioned wrong of adultery in a sexually revolutionary world?” Hirshman paraphrased, “Clinton took a leaf from the liberal feminists’ arguments on pornography and told society it could just look away. Pundit Jonathan Rauch delivered the most telling analysis in 1998, nearing the end of Clinton’s term. Like pornography on the web, Rauch says, adultery is everywhere. Americans didn’t want to live in the suffocating world of the Republican’s religious, monogamous, heterosexual family values. But they didn’t want the sexual anarchy of the free love movement either. So society invoked what Rauch names the hidden law of adultery: If you pretend not to do it, we’ll pretend not to notice.”
And so the country pretended not to see Monica Lewinsky. Hirshman reports, “With Hillary onstage beside him on 60 Minutes, Clinton reminded society of a corollary of the hidden law: only the cuckolded spouse, usually a woman, gets to decide when to call the adulterer out.”
Hirshman adds, “The liberal Clintons’ 60 Minutes interview echoed the early response to adjudicated claims of sexual harassment, where sexual conduct was characterized as personal, not political or subject to legal review. Hillary Clinton gave her verdict on the allegations against here husband and suggested that that should be good enough.”
The Clintons’ antics set sexual harassment issues back to the Civil Rights era. Besides, they could lie and get away with it. “Society could treat sexual harassment at work as a wrongful act and still refuse to attach real consequences to the wrongdoing,” Hirshman notes. “That’s why plaintiffs in sexual harassment cases usually lose. Or don’t sue at all.” And in some countries you can’t even sue the harasser.
With respect to the Monica Lewinsky case, the Clintons attacked her by impugning her character, mischaracterizing her as a “sexually demanding stalker,” claiming she didn’t play with a full deck, and billed her as a “narcissistic loony toon.” In a classic turning of the tables, Hillary summed up the situation as Bill being the victim who had heroically tried to rid himself of this woman.
The price was high for victims of sexual harassment. “It was the turning point of the movement against sexual harassment and abuse for the next two decades, an eternity in social movement time,” Hirshman explains. Marjorie Williams amplifies the point, “When the dust of Clinton’s presidency settles, the laws against sexual harassment will still be on the books, but the social sanctions against the behavior will be irretrievably damaged.”
Hopefully, as we begin a new decade, woman and their claims of harassment will finally be taken seriously.
Rather than reading Hirshman’s reporting, I’d suggest reading a personal account outlined in COMPELLED: Workplace Sexual Harassment, Backlash, Bullying & Gaslighting (2021) by Karen Koslowsky-Jones.
One of these cases struck me – the Clinton–Lewinsky affair – since I recall much of it when it occurred during the 1990s as I raised my family.
David Friend observed that “most Americans made their first real acquaintance with Bill Clinton when they watched him lying about sex on TV in 1992. The episode squarely presented the [Naughty Nineties] with a difficult problem. What to do about the old-fashioned wrong of adultery in a sexually revolutionary world?” Hirshman paraphrased, “Clinton took a leaf from the liberal feminists’ arguments on pornography and told society it could just look away. Pundit Jonathan Rauch delivered the most telling analysis in 1998, nearing the end of Clinton’s term. Like pornography on the web, Rauch says, adultery is everywhere. Americans didn’t want to live in the suffocating world of the Republican’s religious, monogamous, heterosexual family values. But they didn’t want the sexual anarchy of the free love movement either. So society invoked what Rauch names the hidden law of adultery: If you pretend not to do it, we’ll pretend not to notice.”
And so the country pretended not to see Monica Lewinsky. Hirshman reports, “With Hillary onstage beside him on 60 Minutes, Clinton reminded society of a corollary of the hidden law: only the cuckolded spouse, usually a woman, gets to decide when to call the adulterer out.”
Hirshman adds, “The liberal Clintons’ 60 Minutes interview echoed the early response to adjudicated claims of sexual harassment, where sexual conduct was characterized as personal, not political or subject to legal review. Hillary Clinton gave her verdict on the allegations against here husband and suggested that that should be good enough.”
The Clintons’ antics set sexual harassment issues back to the Civil Rights era. Besides, they could lie and get away with it. “Society could treat sexual harassment at work as a wrongful act and still refuse to attach real consequences to the wrongdoing,” Hirshman notes. “That’s why plaintiffs in sexual harassment cases usually lose. Or don’t sue at all.” And in some countries you can’t even sue the harasser.
With respect to the Monica Lewinsky case, the Clintons attacked her by impugning her character, mischaracterizing her as a “sexually demanding stalker,” claiming she didn’t play with a full deck, and billed her as a “narcissistic loony toon.” In a classic turning of the tables, Hillary summed up the situation as Bill being the victim who had heroically tried to rid himself of this woman.
The price was high for victims of sexual harassment. “It was the turning point of the movement against sexual harassment and abuse for the next two decades, an eternity in social movement time,” Hirshman explains. Marjorie Williams amplifies the point, “When the dust of Clinton’s presidency settles, the laws against sexual harassment will still be on the books, but the social sanctions against the behavior will be irretrievably damaged.”
Hopefully, as we begin a new decade, woman and their claims of harassment will finally be taken seriously.
Rather than reading Hirshman’s reporting, I’d suggest reading a personal account outlined in COMPELLED: Workplace Sexual Harassment, Backlash, Bullying & Gaslighting (2021) by Karen Koslowsky-Jones.
July 5, 2019
I liked the oldest history sections but once it got into the era of things I was old enough to have experienced at the time I was distracted by small errors (E.g. Dick Gephardt is from Missouri not Nebraska) and wished that an emphasis on women of color had continued through - for instance, it would have been nice to go beyond the general acknowledgment that Tarana Burke created the #MeToo hashtag a decade ago and into what the activist world around her looked like at the time.
July 18, 2019
In light of the #MeToo movement, Reckoning is a fascinating exploration of the history of combatting sexual harassment and assault in the United States. Beginning in the 1960's, we follow key court cases and touchstone moments in society, including overviews of the different waves of feminist thought and how they intersected with these issues. It is wild to see how far we have come and how different the thinking on these issues was not so very long ago. There is discussion of sex in the workplace, at home, and in political scandals. It is interesting and thought-provoking, following a through-line up to #MeToo and the way that was informed by things that came before. It is also intersectional to a point (more on that below) and emphasizes the way these issues disproportionately affect women of color and women from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Additionally, there are portions that highlight the critical role played by several black women in fighting back against workplace harassment and assault.
While I think this book is well worth reading, I will note a couple of shortcomings. First, this book is almost entirely focused on sexual harassment and assault as it applies to heterosexual cis-women, and this definitely feels like a blind spot. There is a notable absence of considering the ways that these issues affect members of the LGBTQIAP+ community (particularly trans-women) or the ways that they affect gay men or even straight men. I think that makes this feel overly narrow in scope and is disappointing. Additionally, it is clear that the author has very particular perspectives on sex and pornography and, while she discusses the controversy on these issues, it is pretty obvious how she feels about them and not everyone will share her perspective. For this author, sex is always political and therefore if power and dominance are a part of it, that becomes a problem linked to gendered oppression in society. While I see some of the points the author is making, it does come across as a bit condescending toward anyone who feels differently.
Still, I think this book does important work in documenting the progression of legal and cultural change on these issues and would recommend it. I received a copy of this book for review. All opinions are my own.
While I think this book is well worth reading, I will note a couple of shortcomings. First, this book is almost entirely focused on sexual harassment and assault as it applies to heterosexual cis-women, and this definitely feels like a blind spot. There is a notable absence of considering the ways that these issues affect members of the LGBTQIAP+ community (particularly trans-women) or the ways that they affect gay men or even straight men. I think that makes this feel overly narrow in scope and is disappointing. Additionally, it is clear that the author has very particular perspectives on sex and pornography and, while she discusses the controversy on these issues, it is pretty obvious how she feels about them and not everyone will share her perspective. For this author, sex is always political and therefore if power and dominance are a part of it, that becomes a problem linked to gendered oppression in society. While I see some of the points the author is making, it does come across as a bit condescending toward anyone who feels differently.
Still, I think this book does important work in documenting the progression of legal and cultural change on these issues and would recommend it. I received a copy of this book for review. All opinions are my own.
October 10, 2024
An interesting, if rather cursory history of the modern American women's movement against sexual harassment that spans the period from the Ted Kennedy Chappaquiddick incident in 1969 to the backlash against the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett "I Like Beer" Kavanaugh in 2018. Thankfully, contrary to my worries going in, Hirshman makes certain to highlight and underline the fact that working class black women were the vanguard of this movement, fighting long before anyone else took their point seriously (LONG before - Hirshman mentions an abolitionist back in the 1830s who argued against slavery specifically for its impact on women's bodily autonomy). This is an important book, and one that really only suffers because one major thing it frequently warns about throughout its pages - the overturning of Roe v. Wade by a conservative-packed Supreme Court - happened a couple short years after its publication and set the women's movement back in ways even Hirshman couldn't foresee. It's a major setback - but one this book's narrative of a long, ongoing fight to the mountaintop provides a good bit of guidance to get past and move beyond. This may not be the definitive history of modern American feminism but it certainly lays a fine foundation for one.
May 6, 2020
This is an important book about the ongoing campaign to free women from the workplace threat of sexual violence and abuse that culminated in the #MeToo Movement (finally) that unseated offenders like Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, and a who’s who of abusive men in power. Hirshman traces progress in the three tracks of this battle: the law, electoral politics, and the culture. She has plenty of blame to spread around, for women not having made more progress, but liberal Democrats get special scorn for having betrayed their own values repeatedly by trading protection of women’s rights for electoral success. Only now have women themselves—particularly white women—started to become less equivocal about standing up for *all* women, so that their preference has started to reward anti-abuse candidates, but the author hints that there is much more work to do. Kate McKinnon is a special hero in this battle, as are women of color. Hirshman’s attempts at spritely writing—“for crissakes,” is one annoying example—mar the book, as do repeated non sequiturs. But the story is an important one, and her research is solid; I’ll look forward to a follow-up in a decade.
July 2, 2020
Amazing history that chronicles the importance of the feminist movement. Holding a narrow majority of the nation, women need to be given respect. But the “history” (pun intended) of sexism, harassment, and abuse have plagued all women no matter their color, sexual orientation, political background, occupation, relationship status, or socioeconomic standing (not to discount that some of those groups suffer greater than others, specifically women of color, and women of poor socioeconomic standing). Hirshman focuses on all three branches of government: SCOTUS rulings which have muddied waters for victims, legislative inactivity, and presidential abuse of power (specifically Clinton’s coercion of Lewinsky, and Trump’s rise despite Access Hollywood tapes). But as we look, this is not a sign of the times (sexual assault is abundant in times of war and peace, and prevalent in every generation since the beginning of time) nor is it a southern Republican thing (look at northern Democrats like JFK and Al Franken). She successfully argues the #MeToo movement is the push for women to unite for a third wave of feminism. You can count this brother to have the back of my sisters.
August 7, 2019
This wasn't great! As much as Hirshman seemed to be skewering popular feminist movements for lack of focus and organization - I think she tried to do too much with this, and things got lost. In the introduction and maybe also first chapter, she does go hard against white women who have sold out gender equity and justice for comfort and I was here for that, but then doesn't have much to offer as the book goes on about it. There's definitely some very good research in here, I think as another reviewer said, she thinks of Catharine MacKinnon as being more of a central figure to the idea of sexual harassment than she is (again - she's important, but not the only person ever to figure this out)... I don't know. The strongest bits did seem to be legal history/more historical subjects, and then the later chapters on more recent high-profile sexual abuse and harassment cases did not seem as strong. The tone really vacillated wildly between deathly serious and kind of glib about the complexity of trauma and how entrenched rape culture is. There were parts of this I really appreciated but overall, especially with there being so much great coverage of these same issues in the media... I don't think this book is worth it.
July 24, 2019
I loved getting to learn more about the evolution of feminism. From the media’s influences with Linda Lovelace and her experiences that lead to her fighting for her rights to the musical 9 to 5 to Steel Magnolias portraying some daring feminist displays for their times.
I’ve been hearing a lot recently about the laws that have formed our rights, but not about what was behind those influences. The media influences the public more than anything and it was great to hear an evolution of ideas from a cultural and social perspective for once.
I’ve been hearing a lot recently about the laws that have formed our rights, but not about what was behind those influences. The media influences the public more than anything and it was great to hear an evolution of ideas from a cultural and social perspective for once.
December 27, 2022
Incredibly detailed and accessible explanation of the legal and social foundations of American sexual harassment. I read it as research for my podcast, Advanced TV Herstory and even though I have lived through the book's timespan, a lot of the early legal and advocacy work described by Hirshman was new to me. That says a lot about how as women, we need to keep telling and writing the history of issues that effects us.
Highly, highly recommend.
Highly, highly recommend.
July 24, 2019
I found this to be an interesting and engaging read. Having been the victim of sexual harassment in another country I liked how the book appeared to tell the history, the frequency and the way in which sexual abuse and harassment may occur. It’s a great read and one that is written in a way that encouraged me to continue reading without sensationalizing anything.
August 5, 2019
This was a great read, and a powerful telling of the history of sexual harassment law in this country that got us to the #MeToo movement. I was appreciative of all of the legal background, though at times it was a bit overwhelming. Beyond that, I’d say this is a necessary read for anyone who wants to understand how we got to the point of #MeToo and #TimesUp as national conversations.
January 5, 2020
Solid account of the history of anti-harassment law and culture trends leading up to #metoo. Ultimately surface-level and unstructured. Lots of detail about Weinstein, almost none about Cosby or other powerful predators. Lots of detail about Anita Hill vs Clarence Thomas, and Clinton-Lewinsky, but the detail is confusing and reduced my ability to see the forest through the tangle of underbrush.
August 5, 2019
This book is an exceptional history of the feminist movement from the 1950s to today. I learned so much from reading this and it has helped to put words behind the arguments I’ve been wanting to make for years now. I highly recommend that everyone reads this book immediately.
August 18, 2019
I read up to Chapter 6 in this book. The first half of the book was interesting. I learned some new information. Up to Chapter 6, I honestly became bored with the book and was not interested in it anymore.
December 15, 2019
This book covers so much ground on the development of sexual harassment law and policy in ways that are clear, informative, and infuriating. Hirshman is a strong writer who brings together a variety of threads about this important area of law and policy.
July 1, 2019
Disappointing
July 16, 2019
Stunning and life-changing
August 29, 2019
The legal stuff can get a bit dense but overall the book is fabulous. It will inspire and piss off a lot of people.
September 20, 2019
Excellent book. An interesting overview of the 20th and 21st century battle against sexual harassment at work. Well worth reading.
October 5, 2019
I thought I was well-informed about the fight for women’s rights, but I still learned a lot from this book. I find it hard to believe we have made so little progress. Good reading.
November 3, 2019
Puts #MeToo into legal, political, historical and cultural context
January 14, 2020
The threads of different actions are brought together well, but there is some odd phrasing and assumptions that were jarring. Highly worth reading.
February 5, 2020
Very informative.
April 16, 2021
The book is realy amazing. I really liked it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews