Race-ing Justice, En-gendering Power: Essays on Anita Hill, Clarence Thomas, and the Construction of Social Reality

[V]iewers found themselves in a parallel universe where political allegiances barely imaginable a moment earlier sprang to life: an administration that won an election through the shameless exploitation of the mythic black rapist took the offensive against stereotypes about black male sexuality; a political party that had been the refuge of white resentment won the support, however momentary, of the majority of African Americans; a black neoconservative individualist whose upward mobility was fueled by his unbounded willingness to stymie the advancement of other African Americans was embraced under the wings of racial solidarity; and a black woman, herself a victim of racism, was symbolically transformed into the role of a would-be white woman whose unwarranted finger-pointing whetted the appetites of a racist lynch mob.

In 1989, Kimberlé Crenshaw coined the term "intersectionality" to capture "the way in which the particular location of black women in dominant American social relations is unique and in some senses unassimilable into the discursive paradigms of gender and race domination." In 1991 the Thomas/Hill hearings took place--with famed coke can, pubic hair, and Mr., ummm, Silver. And, in 1992, this book, a collection of critical essays addressing race, gender, and theory, "suggested itself," to use Toni Morrison's words, "to evaluate and analyze various aspects of what was and is happening."

As Morrison (our editor) explains in her introduction, "For insight into the complicated and complicating events that the confirmation of Clarence Thomas became, one needs perspective, not attitudes; context, not anecdotes; analyses, not postures." These essays, written by some of the smartest thinkers of the day, aim to provide that insight by deconstructing (I know, I know, everyone hates that word) the interplay of race, gender, politics, and power. All in the context of a Supreme Court nomination.

The collection is quite good. Morrison's introduction by itself is worth the price of admission, but almost all the essays were insightful and engaging analyses of the confirmation hearings and their implications. My favorite, by far was Crenshaw's essay, from which the block quote above came.

Crenshaw criticizes traditional feminism, and white feminists, for a failure of imagination that led to the widespread disbelief of Hill. She explains how the traditional discourse of sexual harassment is grounded in the experiences of white women, and this "grounding of the critique on white women meant that, in a sense Hill (and Thomas) had to be deraced, so that they could be represented as actors in a recognizable story of sexual harassment." But as Crenshaw points out, this narrative then fails to consider "[p]ervasive myths and stereotypes about black women," which play an important role in "whether black women's stories are likely to be believed" or whether "the insult and injury [black women] have experienced is relevant or important."

Against the conceptual difficulties of white feminism, Crenshaw points out how Thomas's supporters were able to weaponize the lynching trope--specifically the violated woman as justification for lynching. "Not only was Thomas suddenly transformed into a victim of racial discrimination, but Anita Hill was further erased as a black woman. Her racial identity became irrelevant in explaining or understanding her position, while Thomas's play on the lynching metaphor racially empowered him."

I find Crenshaw's analysis persuasive and illuminating. Being young, I did not really "live" through the confirmation hearings and did not learn of the "high tech lynching" comment until I watched Confirmation back in 2016. I was incredulous, and first thought the movie had taken some imaginative license. Crenshaw's essay (and the others in this collection) explain what this comment meant in the specific moment.

And Crenshaw's essay is only one example of the smart analysis in the book. The first essay is a letter from an older Black federal judge to Thomas, beseeching him to consider how the civil rights activists of yesteryear made Thomas's ascent to the Court possible. Another essay describes how "racism" was used as a speech act during the proceedings. Another had this title, which is so good I offer it in whole: "A Rare Case Study of Muleheadedness and Men: or How to Try an Unruly Black Witch, with Excerpts from the Heretical Testimony of Four Women, Known to Be Hysterics, Speaking in Their Own Voices, as Translated for This Publication by Brothers Hatch, Simpson, DeConcini, and Specter." (<--That essay was spectacular, BTW).

Anita Hill came to UNLV to speak earlier this year. The idea came up of the Kavanaugh hearings as being a repeat of the Thomas hearings, just without race. Hill explained how this idea was wrong. She said (and I'm paraphrasing), "Race was in that room in everything that was said or done, even if the word 'race' never came up." Reading these essays emphasized the truth of this statement.