|Kristin Gillibrand standing in female bullshit
Kirsten Gillibrand is a Democrat and a liar, but I repeat myself. In her new book, she claims that male Senate colleagues sexually harassed her, but refused to name names, which means either:On the other hand, it does sort of sound like something Joe Biden might say.
A. The harassers were Democrats, and Gillibrand is protecting these sexist swine for partisan reasons;You can believe what you want to believe, but I never believe anything any Democrat says, unless it is independently corroborated, and we have no way to corroborate Kirsten Gillibrand’s stories:
B. She’s lying.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand is giving more details, and dropping f-bombs, about her experience with sexist comments she’s received about her weight, saying she couldn’t tell a male colleague “to go f—- himself.”
“At that moment, if I could have just disappeared, I would have. If I could have just melted in tears, I would have. . .
Ann Althouse posts a poll on whether she's lying or merely feathering her own victim bed:
Why won't Kirsten Gillibrand name the men she says harassed her?
1. She wants to focus attention on the general problem of "how women are treated in the workplace... undervaluing women... and chronically paying them less and treating them poorly and not valuing them." . . .In any event, what she's not telling is the truth, and that makes her a big fat liar.
2. She wants to present herself in a good light, so she's filtered the story so that people see her as an ordinary woman who struggled with her weight and got harassed about it, rather than as an extraordinary woman who received an appointment to her seat in the Senate in part because she was a woman — because she was replacing a woman, Hillary Clinton — and because she had excellent feminine attractiveness. . .
3. If she named the men, she'd have to tell the whole story, and we'd have to see things from their perspective too. The nameless men were mean to her, but if she named them, she might seem mean. Was she unfair? What was the actual context? Maybe it was a friendly, chummy environment where everyone teases everyone else and it was part of being considered one of the guys. Maybe she had drawn attention to her weight gain and expressed worry about it and they were mirroring her remarks supportively or just saying they like her however she looks. . .
4. She wants to protect the men she hasn't named. They're her political allies, perhaps quite well-known characters. I think we can assume that they are all Democrats, since we haven't heard otherwise and she probably would have taken the opportunity to ding Republicans, and since Republicans would be more likely to maintain formal politeness with her and not to assume that they could take liberties.
5. Maybe it didn't happen. There are no names named because there are no
names to name.