Al Franken is a big supporter of ‘women’s issues’ — equal pay, family leave, access to contraception, and abortion among others. On the other hand, he has proved he’s a pig who thinks a sleeping woman is a sex prop. So he has to go, right? Not so fast, says Kate Harding, co-editor of "Nasty Women: Feminism, Resistance, and Revolution in Trump's America."
I don’t believe [Franken] resigning from his position is the only possible consequence, or the one that’s best for American women.
Harding argues that the realities of divisive two-party politics — where only one party is interested in supporting women — makes the removal of any man accused of any abuse a risky proposition for women’s rights.
if we set this precedent in the interest of demonstrating our party’s solidarity with harassed and abused women, we’re only going to drain the swamp of people who, however flawed, still regularly vote to protect women’s rights and freedoms.
Her point is that if the Democrats come up with a zero-tolerance policy for sex abuse, women are faced with the possibility of a Republican Governor replacing axed Democratic Senators with the usual right-wing misogynist.
No doubt we all wish we live in a world where we have politicians available that check every one of our ideological boxes — while being paragons of rectitude. But that person doesn't exist. So the rational voter has to choose between 'more good than bad' and just plain 'bad'.
But, as Harding says, if Republicans start to show enthusiasm for rejecting the abusers in their party, then all bets are off. And all the abusers can go to hell.
(Credit: WaPo)