TEXT A Paula Jones’ case against
Bill Clinton is now, for all possible political consequences and capacity for
media sensation, a fairy routine lawsuit of its kind. It does, however, have
enormous social significance. For those of us who care about sexual harassment,
the matter of Jones v. Clinton is a great conundrum. Consider: if Jones, the
former Arkansas state employee, proves her claims, then we must face the fact
that we helped to elect someone --Bill Clinton -- who has betrayed us on this
vital issue. But if she is proved to be lying, then we must accept that we
pushed onto the public agenda an issue that is venerable to manipulation by
alleged victims. The skeptics will use Jones’ case to east doubt on the whole
cause. Still, Ms Jones deserves the chance to prove her case;
she has a right to pursue this claim and have the process work. It will be
difficult: these kinds of cases usually are, and Ms. Jones’ task of suing a
sitting president is harder than most. She does have one thing sitting
on her side: her case is in the courts. Sexual-harassment claims are really
about violations of the alleged victims’ civil rights, and there is no better
forum for determining and assessing those violations -- and finding the truth --
than federal court. The judicial system can put aside political to decide these
complicated issues. That is a feat that neither the Senate Judicial nor ethics
committees have been able to accomplish--witness the Clarence Thomas and Bob
Packwood affairs. One lesson: the legal arena, not the political one, is the
place to settle these sensitive problems. Some have argued that
the people (the "feminists") who rallied around me have failed to support Jones.
Our situations, however, are quite different. In 1991 the country was in the
middle of a public debate over whether Clarence Thomas should be confirmed to
the Supreme Court. Throughout that summer, interest groups on both sides weighed
in on his nomination. It was a public forum that invited a public conversation.
But a pending civil action -- even one against the president -- does not
generally invite that kind of public engagement. Most of the
public seems content to let the process move forward. And given the conundrum
created by the claim, it is no wonder that many ("feminists" included) have been
slow to jump into the Jones-Clinton fray. But people from all walks of life
remain open to her suit. We don’ t yet know which outcome we must confront: the
president who betrayed the issue or the woman who used it. Whichever it is, we
should continue to pursue sexual harassment with the same kind of energy and
interest in eliminating the problem that we have in the past, regardless of who
is the accused or the accuser. The statistics show that about 40 percent of
women in the work force will encounter some form of harassment. We can’ t afford
to abandon this issue now. What does the word "conundrum" in the first paragraph mean