Henrietta Hay's Column

It's not easy being what my grandson calls an LOL (Liberal Old Lady). It means having opinions you are willing to defend, but being old enough to know that stereotypes are almost always false and that very few things in this world are simple.

When a male acquaintance of mine way back in May, 1994 sneered, "How come you believed Anita Hill and you doubt Paula Jones?" I had to concede that it was a fair question. Now that Jones is once again in the headlines the question is being debated again.

Feminist groups are criticized today because they have not spoken out on the Paula Jones issue as they did about Anita Hill. But critics tend to forget that eventually feminist principles win out over practical politics, as when the women finally called for the resignation of strong pro-choice, pro-women's rights Bob Packwood. On Jones, we're waiting for the facts to be in.

Feminism, like the civil rights movement, like any other social movement, embraces a lot of opinions and beliefs. But the Anita Hill case galvanized American women, not only by what may or may not have happened between her and Clarence Thomas, but by the actions of the Senate Judiciary Committee. At the Thomas hearings the men on the committee pilloried Ms. Hill so viciously that women across the country rose up in wrath. Anita Hill emerged as a woman speaking for justice for all women.

In addition to great political gains for women in the election of 1992, the whole event brought a new awareness of sexual harassment in the workplace. In the years since that hearing serious efforts are finally being made to combat it.

As she often does, Ellen Goodman summarized the Hill situation quite well. She wrote at that time, "In the post Hill atmosphere, it has finally, belatedly, become possible for victims of sexual harassment to speak up and be believed. But taking the charge seriously doesn't mean taking every accuser seriously. Not every Woman is a victim and not every pass is a federal offense."

Paula Jones has charged then Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton with sexual harassment which she says took place in May 1991. She certainly has a right to be heard, and she has been guaranteed her day in court. The question is not whether, but when. Activist women are reserving judgment until we hear her story. This is what we did with Anita Hill.

Patricia Ireland, national president of NOW, said in a statement last week, "Every Paula Jones deserves to be heard, no matter how old she is and how long ago the incident occurred, no matter what kind of accent she has or how much money she makes and no matter who she associates with."

Paula Jones has made some interesting choices. She waited three years to file suit, during which time she did not lose her job and received standard cost of living raises. And now she has aligned herself with Pat Robertson, right wing publicist, and Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry. She has not requested help from NOW and has refused to talk to Ms. Ireland, so let's not criticize the women activists.

We will never know what took place in that hotel room in Little Rock six years ago. But careful reading of her entire legal complaint makes me suspect that she is more concerned with her reputation and President Clinton's -- bettering hers and damaging his -- than her virtue.

So yes, I have some doubt about her motives. We will have to wait until she has had a chance to tell her story in court. The Supreme Court will decide whether or not a sitting president can be forced to stand trial for actions which presumably took place before he took office. The decision is not due until late spring and everyone has an opinion. I think that the country will be better served if the trial is postponed until 2001.

My LOL status has taught me that situations have to be appraised on their merits -- or demerits. If I want to believe Anita and disbelieve Paula, that does not damage my status as a feminist.

Paula has a right to be heard. But I don't have to believe her.