A quick word on what happened to Gilda Cobb-Hunter

Regarding what happened to Gilda Cobb-Hunter, I’m inclined to agree with this Tweet:

That’s from the former spokesman for House Democrats, by the way. If Govan is found innocent of the charge, I’ll take that back. But the case for him doesn’t look good. I trust Gilda. She’s not a person to make a fuss about something that didn’t happen.

But you know, I’m old school. Remember last month when John Kelly said that when he was young, “a lot of things were sacred in our country. Women were sacred, looked upon with great honor. That’s obviously not the case anymore, as we’ve seen from recent cases (which I took to mean a reference to the behavior of Harvey Weinstein and others — such as Kelly’s boss).”

This caused harrumphing among some of our feminist friends, with reactions such as this one: “No, John Kelly, women should not be seen as ‘sacred’.”

But yeah… they kinda should. That’s kind of one of the prerequisites for having a civilization, instead of a Hobbesian jungle. We’re getting a lot of reminders of that lately…

28 thoughts on “A quick word on what happened to Gilda Cobb-Hunter

  1. Karen Pearson

    News flash! A lot of the accusations occurred when we were younger, as in 20, 30, or 40 years ago. Women didn’t speak up about it because unless you were beaten up as well, the usual assumption was, “She asked for it.” Often even if you were injured, you were blamed because of your dress, or where you were or the way you acted. It is only now, when women have come forward that people are beginning to see how prevalent such behavior was/is. And if we don’t continue to speak up it will continue as the same horrendous rate. BTW, young girls (12-18 app) are much easier to confuse and intimidate than older ones are.

    1. Mark Stewart

      People knew such behavior too often occurred in years past. People were just willing to turn a blind eye.

      That’s the problem with John Kelly’s outlook that “women were sacred.” It says white-washing the truth was more important than actually standing up for your mothers, wives, friends, girlfriends, children, classmates, colleagues, employees, etc. – then or now. We all know this behavior occurred (still occurs) so the statement is patently false. It’s objectification. And that’s one of the things that leads abusers to abuse.

      1. Brad Warthen Post author

        No, I have to disagree with you there. He was speaking of the values of honorable men, and he was sincere about it.

        There have always been men who were scum, the kind who don’t have ANY values. Just as there are today.

        It’s completely unfair to say that because there were scumbags in existence in the time in question (just as there are today), it invalidates the values held by principled men in that time.

        People do that a lot in order to run down the past. As soon as one person says there was a time when X was better, someone will immediately shout “But what about Y?” Yep, well, Y was pretty bad, but it doesn’t devalue X.

        People dismiss chivalry by saying, “But there were men who were not knights!” Well, of course there were. That doesn’t invalidate the good that existed in the world at the same time…

    2. Richard

      What you’re saying is men instigated 100% of all attacks. What does a man do if he’s being slapped, punched, scratched, etc…? Does he have the right to defend himself or should he just take the abuse?

      That said, until we know all of the facts we don’t know who started this or exactly what happened. It’s be easy for Cobb-Hunter to hit Govan, Govan grab her wrist to keep her from striking again, and Cobb-Hunter playing the victim. We’re talking about career politicians… not the most ethical people in the world.

      1. Brad Warthen Post author

        No one has alleged that she in any way did anything to him. There’s been no suggestion of that, that I’ve seen.

        So it’s kind of weird for you to suggest that was the case…

  2. bud

    Is anyone as flabbergasted as I am that so many conservatives are defending Roy Moore? He’s a complete piece is s**t, yet his accusers are being attaked.

    1. Barry

      It’s sad some of the things some conservatives are saying in Alabama.

      One state official said he would support him even if it was true. Amazing.

  3. Bart

    Odd isn’t it? At one time I can recall the Democrats lining up outside the Capitol Building in Washington, DC in support of Bill Clinton when he was being impeached for lying about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. Over the years from the time he was a young governor until his presidency ended, he had numerous affairs and along with his wife and the Democrat party was defended to the bitter end.

    Anyone can say that was then, this is now and say it with a straight face but in the end, the total and absolute hypocrisy cries out in a very loud voice, “Why didn’t you stand up against Clinton the way you expect Republicans to stand up against Moore?” And please, don’t reply with the crap that it is not a legitimate comparison, both involve lack of morals and in the end, isn’t that the real issue?

    Don’t take my comments as a defense of Moore. I read the stories about his proclivity for dating younger females when he was in his early 30s and the account of the young 14 year old girl. There is no excuse for his behavior with her but the other girls were of age and one dated him with her family’s blessing. The other girl was told she couldn’t date him and it stopped.

    My point is that on both sides, righteous outrage is always convenient when it involves the other side but is frowned upon when it involves one of your own. When the Weinstein story broke and so many of the Hollywood females looking for a break were taken advantage of, it was a matter of time before the dam broke and what has always been known but not talked about suddenly became the new rage under the heading of #MeToo. Now, anyone who ever said or did anything that could be honestly or remotely considered an unwanted sexual advance is being outed by the victims. The nasty behavior of males in the entertainment industry is finally out in the open and more and more stories are coming out about some of Hollywood’s icons. The same is true for our politicians who have taken advantage of their position and power.

    It is a matter of morality, not anything else. If one defends their side when morals are violated, how can one attack the other side for violating moral standards. In one’s view, the offender may be a piece of s**t but the offender on his or her side is a great person and he or she will defend him or her.

    VP Pence has been mocked, laughed at, criticized, accused of being anti-female, and any other negative that can be dragged out of the attack vocabulary because he won’t be alone with another female without his wife present. Maybe these iconic Hollywood and political types should take a lesson from VP Pence when it comes to personal behavior. You might not agree with his politics but how can you disagree with his moral standards on personal behavior?

    1. Pat

      I didn’t know that about VP Pence, but don’t think he should have been criticized for it. Rev. Billy Graham had the same rule. That decision is a matter of self preservation.
      I always thought Monica Lewinsky pursued Pres. Clinton, but don’t know about his other relationships.
      Moore, on the other hand, seemed to have been drawn to girls half his age. As a prosecutor, he should have known where to draw the line.

      1. Bart

        “Moore, on the other hand, seemed to have been drawn to girls half his age. As a prosecutor, he should have known where to draw the line.”

        Couldn’t agree more, he should have known. I am not siding with Moore, just pointing out the hypocrisy on both sides. As for Lewinsky pursuing Clinton, maybe she did but he certainly didn’t have to take her up on her advances, did he? That is the point.

        The examples of inappropriate behavior by politicians with vulnerable young people is long and disgusting. One House member was having an inappropriate relationship with a young male page and was called on it. When he was censured by the House, he stood with his back to the podium and his fellow party members applauded. He was sent back to the House for several more terms. Others in the opposition party committed similar acts but were not welcomed back and most resigned from office.

        When morality becomes irrelevant, what does that say about the ones who continue to support and vote them back in office? No wonder the political atmosphere is so toxic in this country.

      2. JesseS

        “I always thought Monica Lewinsky pursued Pres. Clinton, but don’t know about his other relationships.”

        If a man has power over a woman and he either makes advances or accepts advances it’s sexual misconduct. Society can no longer accept that and give it a pass.

        Both Clinton and Moore should be total pariahs.

      1. Bart

        Age is not the main issue except for Moore and the 14 year old girl. Monica being over 21 doesn’t change one thing when it comes to the morality of the situation. Then when the affair became a public spectacle, Hillary Clinton blamed Lewinsky for her husband’s actions and called Lewinsky a “narcissistic loony toon”. In essence, Hillary Clinton was the chief enabler for Bill Clinton when she went after the women who came forward and told their story about Clinton. If Hillary kept defending him, what did he have to lose if he continued having affairs?

        Bill Clinton flew on Epstein’s private jet called the “Lolita Express” over 20 times and some were without his secret service detail. Epstein is a convicted pedophile. Dog, fleas, etc. And according to other records, Trump and Epstein were not strangers either. If you are not aware of the “Lolita Express”, may be a good idea to read up on it. Epstein was charged, convicted, and served over a year for providing and engaging in sex with girls supposedly as young as 12. And just to add to the sordid tale, Kevin Spacey was also a frequent guest on Epstein’s jet.

        And we wonder why there are no lines that won’t be crossed by men and women in power. Yes, there are women predators out there as well. I do recall a rather powerful female making a public comment about performing a sex act for Clinton because of his position on an issue she supported.

        Is it worth selling our souls to the Trumps and Clintons of this world because they carry the banner for the causes we support? When does our personal integrity enter into the picture? When do we say, enough is enough, I am not going to support any candidate whose moral behavior is non-existent? I didn’t vote for Clinton or Trump and if I had to do it over again, I still wouldn’t vote for either one. And I sleep very well knowing that my vote didn’t go to either one by commission or omission.

        This country deserves better than anything either one can offer or at least I used to believe that. Now I am beginning to believe we are getting what we deserve with Trump in the White House and Clinton on a book tour bemoaning how she lost and it wasn’t really her fault.

        1. Karen Pearson

          Bart, sexual predation by against a person by another person who is her/his superior is bad enough, but pedophilia takes it to a whole different level.

      2. Lynn Teague

        Agreed, Karen. Young teenagers are especially vulnerable because of the emotional confusion of the age (some of it with definite physical origin through hormones) as well as lack of complete adult brain architecture development. It isn’t just the development of the genital organs that matters.Those who are 14 might not be technically prepubescent, but they are still far too immature for attention from an adult over 30 to be anything other than disgustingly predatory. They cannot be grouped with persons 18 or 21 years old.

        1. Brad Warthen Post author

          We’re just talking about a matter of degree here. The difference in maturity between 14 and 18 may be dramatic, but it’s still quantitative, not qualitative.

          Monica Lewinsky was as young and callow and powerless as you’re likely to find in the White House. And her behavior — her purported “pursuit” of Clinton — testifies to her immaturity, not to maturity. It shows she was not a responsible adult in full possession of her faculties.

    2. Barry

      I criticized Bill Clinton and never voted for him.

      I criticized Trump and didn’t vote for him.

      I’d write in Barney Fife’s name if I lived in Alabama instead of voting for a Roy Moore.

        1. bud

          Bill Clinton shouldn’t have lied under oath but the whole Republican witch hunt against him was disgusting. White Water was proven to have been about nothing. I defended him not because I thought he was completely innocent but because there was a bigger principal at stake. Clinton was entrapped. I’d still defend him and don’t find that hypocritical. Not comparable to pedophilia.

          1. Brad Warthen Post author

            “Entrapped?” Monica Lewinsky was a TRAP set for him? Too bad he didn’t have Admiral Ackbar around to warn him.

            Poor fella. Reminds me of the defense of the statutory rapist in the Cheech and Chong joke, saying he pleads insanity.

            “Insanity?” asks the judge,

            Yes, says the accused. “I’m just crazy about that stuff!”

            Yeah, people used to laugh at such things…

          2. Brad Warthen Post author

            Also, let me just edit that for you, Bud: “Bill Clinton shouldn’t have lied under oath.” See, that works. It’s a better statement if you stop before the “but.”

  4. Bart

    It may be a good idea if everyone would take time to read my opening sentence about Roy Moore in my reply to Karen. Just in case you missed it and decided to skip over it, here it is again. “Age is not the main issue except for Moore and the 14-year-old girl.” Hope that is clear enough for you.

    It might be another good idea to understand the definition of a pedophile or pedophilia. Depending on which source you go to or research, there are different definitions. The legal definition of a pedophile is: “an adult sexually attracted to children” or a person with pedophilia. The common definition of a pedophile or pedophilia is: “Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.”

    Then the definition of prepubescent is vital to understand the true meaning of someone suffering from pedophilia. Prepubescent is one who has not yet reached puberty and puberty generally starts around 11 to 13 and based on the studies for young people reaching puberty, they are reaching puberty at much younger ages than ever before and this has been an upward trend for decades.

    You may be wondering why I am responding to this by going through the definitions of pedophilia, prepubescent, and puberty. Well, I am going to share something with all of you that I have shared with just one other member of the blog community and then it was just a short conversation.

    At the age of 9 and that was 64 years ago, my family moved into the city from the rural backwoods. Moved to a house with indoor plumbing and electricity in every room. Hay was still stuck in my hair and I had never been introduced to a world so vastly different than the one I had lived in for 9 years. An older boy who lived across the street, 6 years older to be exact, befriended me and before I had any idea of the ways of a sexual predator, I found myself becoming a victim. Puberty was still a few years away and ignorance of perversion was common among most people at the time. These things existed but they were never discussed in private, much less in public as they are now. But, some were very well informed about perversion and how to manipulate vulnerable and ignorant young boys and girls and unfortunately, I met one. The predator took advantage of me several times and always told me that what was going on was what “friends did for friends”. It never felt right but not wanting to lose his friendship, it continued for a while. When the internal guilt and feeling of it not being right finally reached the point where I knew it had to stop, I attacked him with everything I could muster and punched him again and again in my living room and he left very angry. We only spoke a couple of times afterwards and I would never allow myself to be alone with him.

    I wanted to tell my parents or someone but didn’t know how. Imagine the confusion about how to describe what went on and how many times it happened. When I did decide to tell them, unfortunately or fortunately, I overheard a conversation about someone who had been raped and about two local males who were caught engaged in homosexual acts. The crux of the conversation was that the rape victim had it coming and was just as guilty as the perpetrator and the two men knew what they were doing and what they were. Needless to say, it literally scared the hell out of me and since my parents and other adults thought the same thing, then I believed it was my fault and I was like the two men who had been caught. I never blamed my parents for their view because as anyone who lived during that time can attest to the fact that most rape victims were blamed for one reason or another. “She was asking for it” was the common reply or comment. Or, “if he wasn’t like that, he wouldn’t have done it or allowed it”.

    Imagine the time period and being 9 years old carrying a secret so terrifying that it caused nightmares about the possibility of it being exposed. The secret stayed with me for 40 years before I had the courage to talk to a counselor about it. His comment was almost as devastating as the incidents. He told me that being an intelligent person, it was incumbent on me to do some research and understand that young males engaged in such things and that it didn’t indicate or imply I was gay or homosexual. He told me he didn’t understand why the molestation still bothered me. I got up and left, never went back. When 40 years of damage has been done, stupid comments like his didn’t help at all. I was looking for help and didn’t get it.

    It was another 15 years before I could tell anyone close to me and then I held back most of the details. The emotional, psychological, and physical damage is unfathomable unless one has been through the experience. The doubts are ever present, and it takes more than the average person can ever imagine overcoming and managing them so they don’t destroy who one really is. When society was able to listen and not judge, I finally told the full story to a few close to me. It was a relief to a degree but there is still a residual or remnant left inside that can rear its ugly head on occasion. At one time before going to the counselor, I found out where he had moved to and when my family was on vacation and I was alone at home, I got a gun and was going to go to his home and shoot him. I was in my car ready to leave but what stopped me was the realization that I would lose my family and his death wouldn’t change the past. I also knew that taking another person’s life was not who I am.

    Eventually I gave everything up to God and Christ at the foot of the Cross. Since relieving my burden to Christ, it has been easier and easier to live with and I have forgiven my molester who does meet the definition of a pedophile. I haven’t forgotten but I cannot hold hatred in my heart either. So, when I try to get anyone to understand the difference between what is inappropriate and pedophilia, I am not coming from an academic position, I am coming from real life experience.

    What Roy Moore did was inappropriate but not pedophilia. Not one of the young girls Moore dated or acted inappropriately with were prepubescent. If he is a pedophile, then it very likely he would have molested others who were prepubescent. If you cannot accept that, then the entire message about my personal experience was wasted. His poor judgment and actions are an indication that he isn’t the right person to send to represent Alabama or any state in the Senate. But, that goes for so many who are serving as members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.

    When we accept the behavior of Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, and others who are in positions of power because of a misguided and misplaced belief in a social or political cause, then by fiat, we are tacitly approving their behavior for selfish and personal reasons. We rationalize to the point that their behavior is encouraged and enabled when we defend them because it suits our position on an issue or cause. We encourage immoral behavior and the perpetrator is given a pass by us if we continue to vote for or defend them. I don’t expect perfection and understand no one is perfect. I am the least perfect of all the people I know and have no problem admitting it. We all have our faults but when it comes to the rank immoral behavior of some we put in power, who can we blame for what happens afterwards? If Roy Moore is elected, what does that say about his supporters? When we apply labels without understanding their true meaning or definition, then we diminish who we are and our message loses any meaning.

    This was not easy for me to write or post but maybe it will explain why I truly believe if we don’t move forward together and not just expect but demand a high moral standard when we vote for someone whether we agree their politics or not, then we will stagnate as a nation and as citizens of the United States of America. If we go by what one described as a “bigger principle” and accept the behavior of the POTUS, where does that leave our principles? The people we elect, send to represent us, and support is a direct reflection of who WE are. Think about it.

Comments are closed.