Q: What was your reaction when you read George Will's column? You didn't know that was coming I'm sure.
Sendrow: No, at first actually I tried to avoid it but I had many Facebook friends sent me the article, I was of course outraged, he made so many grotesque remarks about sexual assault, dismissing not only my claims, but essentially using that as a way to dismiss all sexual assault claims. Diminishing what it looks like on college campuses as if it doesn't exist.
I did this follow up post to highlight the ugliness of George Will's character. His affront to all sexual assault victims can not be minimized and how ludicrous it is that The Washington Post and Fred Hiatt have done nothing other than defending his actions to address this issue.
The Post's editorial page editor Fred Hiatt rushed to Will's defense, telling Media Matters that his column was "within the realm of legitimate debate." Using the word "legitimate" — a word that has been invoked by conservative men in a rape apologist context before — to describe Will's column must have been a Freudian slip.
If George Will had written about any other indignity or crime perpetrated by the powerful on the disempowered — race-motivated violence, xenophobia, child abuse, — and implied that victims who came forward were just doing it for the "status," he'd be out on his ass faster than Donald Sterling on greased roller skates.
Hiatt actually used the word "legitimate," when describing Will's opinion. Yikes.
Please let Doug Feaver firstname.lastname@example.org the Ombudsman know how you feel about Will's presence on their pages.
I think someone needs to remind Kay Bailey Hutchison that an employer propositioning one of their employees is not just an "off-color remark" and would indeed fit the definition of sexual harassment. Apparently she's a little confused after watching Read more...