This is a powerful story – and a needed one. You should read it. Too many Ambers exist, in America, and across the world. It is inexcusable.
While the #MeToo movement may cause some of these stories to see daylight, and a few others to result in the stern application of consequences, they are anecdotes. Until we begin to take seriously that Society ignoring the Rule of Law is WHY these happen, that oligarchies exist in communities, high schools, city councils, as well as nations, that too many on our side of the tracks just do not care about those on the other, these anecdotes will not be dealt with as they should. Predators will continue to prey, and none of our most vulnerable will be freed from that vulnerability to reach the heights their talents & determination – once – offered them.
For me the most disappointing part of the #MeToo movement is the political response. Correcting behavior that – only – can be described as “wrong” is the job of Society and, hence, of our politics. People often comment that my view of punishment is harsh: do this and die, whether a child rapist or a country.
Amber is why.
Had the previously described episode been dealt with as harshly as the law allowed, had the new School official been allowed to put the welfare of our most vulnerable kids first, would the attack on Amber have occurred? Probably not. Had Amber’s case been dealt with as harshly as the law allowed, would downstream assaults have occurred? Would they still be occurring? Certainly not in as great a number. And why was it not? The oligarchy implicitly and explicitly rejected the Rule of Law if the result of applying it would fall on them.
Society lost what Amber could have become because some are more equal than others, something that never should exist in America.
But it is the unalterable fact of women, and, perhaps, Society, putting their faith in fixing this problem of the unequal application of the law, in a political party unequivocally opposed to that Rule of Law I find most disturbing.
Anecdotes are unneeded in my argument but could begin with the unabashed worship of a president-rapist and his enabler wife by the same crowd hash-tagging the world with #MeToo. The entire anti-Kavanaugh atmosphere is based on the idea that he may – MAY – return Roe to law, rather than leave it where it began as extra-Constitutional policy specifically rejecting the same Rule of Law to which the #MeToo crowd now demands adherence.
Demanding the Rule of Law yet trusting Democrats to achieve it is monstrously naïve. One searches in vain for a Democrat demanding the equal application of law, indeed for the supremacy of law that is at the foundation of the only nation in which #MeToo possibly could have begun. Grooming gangs, anyone?
Are select targets being dropped? Maybe. Harvey & Les and other zillionaires are being removed from power, often with multi-million-dollar parachutes. What does anyone expect these men, now freed from any type of responsibility to a board, shareholders or community, to do with their lives? Stop preying? Seriously? Will any see prison time? Seriously? Will the lives they have damaged ever be repaired? Seriously? Will pols return their money and connections and networks? Seriously?
That the GOP, yet again, is too timid to say what must be said to effect the changes required surprises, unfortunately, not at all: “The #MeToo movement is trusting that those who reject the law suddenly will obey the law, which is an absurdity.” It is, again unfortunately, of a piece with the unwillingness of the GOP in any discussion on education to note, “Democrats have owned education for 80 years; if Democrats wanted better education, we’d have better education. Voting for Democrats to better education is absurd.” In all cultural issues one can say the same.
If women want the culture fixed, it seems odd to rely on those demanding its utter destruction to fix it. If moms and dads want their daughters safe, expecting that safety from the party of anti-law, of Antifa, of BLM, and the cultural Brownshirts now rising is ridiculous.
The most unfortunate part of the debate is that no one from the party that once stood for the Rule of Law (but stands now only for the establishment oligarchy) stands on this issue; that none are linking it to the Rule of Law, and whose daughters (uniquely as Democrats have few kids at all, and even fewer girls), are and will continue to be harmed most of all by their refusal.
But it is broader, far broader than #MeToo. We allow crap teachers rather than applying extant standards, so we won’t be “mean.” We send our kids off to die rather than using technology to annihilate the enemies killing – our own children – and causing our liberty to regress, in the name of “security,” … because we don’t want to be “mean.” We dilute our future by listening and thereby giving credence to the insanity of the LGBTQ crowd, now affecting even the objectivity of science that has provided all technological and hence physical progress for millennia… because we don’t want to be “mean.” Could our moral progress have occurred absent our physical progress? No.
Can society even have the Rule of Law without some seeing it as “mean?” No. The choice cannot be to overthrow Law.
We allow the adolescent, fully-clothed nonsense that – may – have happened to Ford to be equated with the utter destruction of Amber.
America was based on law. Democracy dies not in darkness, but in the rejection of law.
And neither party is pointing out this fact.
That is the shame of #MeToo.
That is why Amber will not be the last victim.