Were there positive and negative aspects to Anita Hill’s testimony?

The 1991 Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill sexual harassment claims produced sensational headlines and introduced sexual harassment into the national dialogue. The subject has now returned to the spotlight as October marks the 20th anniversary of the hearings.

I have no personal vendetta against Clarence Thomas.

FREE Term Paper on Anita Hill Essay - ExampleEssays
Photo provided by

Essay heading: Paper On Anita Hill - ESSAYS BANK

Clarence Thomas was nominated because he could be depicted as "an African American Horatio Alger." (Horatio Alger is actually the author of a series of turn-of-the-century stories in which a poor boy makes good; but his name has come to be associated with the characters he created.) Thomas was born in Pin Point, Georgia, to desperately poor family. He unquestionably studied hard to go to college and Yale Law School and then into a government position as head of the Equal Opportunity Commission. His advancement in government was based certainly in part on his identification with the conservative Republican regime: "Thomas was already learning to profit from presenting himself as a witness to a conservative public from the world of 'real' African-Americans" (Stansell, 1992:261).

Paper on Anita Hill - 515 Words - StudyMode

Clarence Thomas' nomination and Anita Hill's testimony and its consequences is an extended story of the ways those in power use and exploit difference. Race, class and gender are all there in Clarence Thomas' rise to this nomination and in Anita Hill's collision with him. Clarence Thomas's nomination was important to the ideology of the politics of difference because he could be packaged to represent one of the great lies those-in-power need those-without-power to believe: that the United States is a meritocracy, that the people running things are doing so because they are the best and the brightest, that it is what you know not who you know that matters.

Anita Hill passed a polygraph test administered by Minor who declared she was telling the truth about Clarence Thomas.
Photo provided by

ANITA HILL: The incident with ..

People responded in a variety of ways to being confronted with this issue of meaning. Some stuck very close to the case at hand and simply said they did not believe Anita Hill--a stance that would seem to imply that the practices were wrong but that people perhaps did not wish to confront just how wrong. Others said that Hill was making a mountain out of molehill, that this was just office banter, that she welcomed Thomas's advances--a stance that seems to imply that these practices are acceptable. Others felt Hill was telling the truth and that Thomas should not be confirmed--a stance that seems to say that these practices exist and they are wrong. Others saw the whole ordeal as the attempt to crucify a black man--a stance that suggests the practices are wrong but also shows the depth and complexity of the politics of difference. So what is the meaning of a friendly pat, a joke with sexual innuendo, a light brush of the arm?

Clarence Thomas opinion in Brumfield v

How did Anita Hill’s testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee help Patricia Williams, along with many other women, to stop “pretending that nothing had happened” with regards to inappropriate male behavior in the workplace Are you looking for a similar paper or any other quality academic essay?

with his former employee Anita Hill accusing him of sexual harassment

The response to Anita Hill's testimony in October 1991 was a response to the possibility of injustice and inequality triumphing. In a brilliant analysis of media coverage of the hearings, Wahneema Lubiano (1992) shows how in various ways tried to show the hearing process as fair and equal. She takes as one example the famous pictures run on October 12 of Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas each being sworn into testify. The pictures taken at face value, Lubiano interprets, suggest equality under the law. But in point of fact Anita Hill was one lone woman, whom the Senate Judiciary Committee had tried not to call to testify, matched against the power of the White House and the fifteen male Senators who became her judges--none of whom had probably ever been sexually harassed. And further, this was not about two black people who had risen to prominence but about the ways a white power establishment could try to manipulate the politics of difference. pictures were meant to reassure the public that justice was working.