Recently a tape has been leaked where a young Hillary Clinton is interviewed about her history as a lawyer. There is a discussion about a man she represented, who had been accused of raping a 12-year old girl. The suspect specifically had asked for a female lawyer, and Clinton took the case as a favor to a lawyer friend.
What is probably the most disturbing admission is that the accused had taken a polygraph test, and passed. Clinton then laughs while saying that she will never trust those things again. So obviously she believed the man had raped the child, but still proceeded with her job to defend him – which she did quite successfully.
When hearing this, my initial shock was mostly provoked by the fact that Clinton is a woman. I found myself wondering how she could be callous about defending a rapist? I saw her actions as sinister because I had this assumption that she should have felt a greater responsibility, or least empathy for the victim.
Yet I don’t know if that is fair. Just because Clinton is a woman, doesn’t mean I should have held her to some distinctive standard of solidarity. Of course I would have been disgusted to hear this kind of statement from a male lawyer, but I wouldn’t have been as shocked. Clinton’s female form triggered me because if we women can’t even defend and prioritize our rights over the pursuit of power, then who will?
I think this is exactly the problem, and why women have been, and will continue to be subjugated. In order to gain real power, a woman has to act like a man. Regardless of gender, those who climb the upper echelons of true domination do so with the same agenda – do what you have to do to get ahead.
Whether we are talking about politics, business, or law… the systems themselves breed inhumanity. Politicians are inherently corrupt because they are dependent on big business for funding, Wall Street prioritizes profit over rationality, and if you want to be revered as a lawyer, it isn’t about justice – but rather winning cases. I am sure there are people within these establishments who prioritize truth over personal gain, but those aren’t the ones we hear about. Clinton wasn’t unique in her actions, but in fact completely status quo.
A truly empathetic, compassionate, sensitive person cannot thrive in this landscape. That is not the culture of power, nor can it be under these confines. Clinton is just living up to the archetype of Washington that already prevails. There is this assumption that we choose between “the lesser of two evils” because our political parties don’t vary significantly when it comes to policy, but it isn’t just ideology that is the problem. It is the actual people who have been capable of pushing their way through the ranks that is.
