This was the point
Trump's deposition shows how allegations of sexual violence helped, not hindered, his presidential bid
One of the things that was often asked by the feminist and liberal left after Trump’s shock election win in 2016 was how could this have happened? How could this have happened after everything we know, everything that was said?
And the answer to me was always really clear. It happened precisely because of what he said.
I’m speaking specifically about the Access Hollywood tapes, where Trump admitted to groping women without their consent. The tape was intended to be the big gotcha, the moment when there was no more denying his attitudes towards women. It was supposed to be the moment when it was no longer possible to ignore the line of women who had accused him of harassing and assaulting them. The tape said - don’t believe THEM? Then believe THIS!
Trump’s response to the tape was the typical bluster and contradictions, where an apologetic statement would next be overrun by machismo and then a denial. That response in itself helped strengthen his opposition’s argument – surely, surely this is the end for him. Surely the allegations, the admission, the pathetic attempt to brazen it out, surely he cannot recover from this?
But recover from this he did, and the rest, as they say, is history.
I am talking about an old news story from 2016 here in the year of our lord 2023 because of Trump’s deposition in the E Jean Carroll case, where he was questioned about the recording. Caroll alleges she was raped by Trump in a department store, Trump denies the allegations.
During the deposition, Trump was asked about the Access Hollywood tapes:
KAPLAN: And you say – and again this has become very famous – in this video, ‘“I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the p*ssy. You can do anything.” That’s what you said. Correct?
TRUMP: Well, historically, that’s true with stars.
KAPLAN: It’s true with stars that they can grab women by the p*ssy?
TRUMP: Well, that’s what, if you look over the last million years I guess that’s been largely true. Not always, but largely true. Unfortunately or fortunately.
KAPLAN: And you consider yourself to be a star?
TRUMP: I think you can say that. Yeah.
This was taken from the CNN write-up.
So let me get to my point…
What so many of us failed to understand is that Trump triumphed not in spite of the recording, or in spite of the allegations. He triumphed because of them.
There is a certain type of man who saw Trump’s disrespect of women, and wanted a piece of that for himself. Trump to them represented what they believed feminism had robbed from men: the right to access a woman’s body, no matter what. These are men who felt that feminism had denied them their birth right: a willing, submissive wife. Trump would restore that right. When they watched a rich, brash man boast about sexually harassing women; when they saw devastated women reporting what he had done to them; they saw a man they wanted to be, and a man who would allow them to do what they yearned to do… if only he got into power.
Trump became the General in the war against men, and he was a general that would lead angry, embittered men convinced of their own supremacy, to victory.
To these men, Trump’s victory was an act of permission: permission to say what they wanted about women, to do what they wanted to do to women, and to shut the mouths of any woman who said no.
This was particularly evident in the Red Pill subreddit, an online community of men’s rights activists who were politicised to support Trump in the 2016 election. Men in this subculture were convinced that they were in a war, and Trump was the ultimate alpha who would lead them to victory over pro-abortion feminist Hillary Rodham-Clinton. They saw accusations of sexual harassment as a reason to vote for Trump. A vote for him was a vote against women, and a vote for men’s sexual entitlement. This post from the time explains the Red Pill keenness:
“When somebody accuses a powerful or famous figure like Trump of “sexual assault,” I don’t look the other way. I don’t denounce them or their behavior. Instead I run towards them, because there is no truer signal which side somebody is on, than when they’re given a bogus accusation by the establishment. This is our beacon to find allies in the war.”
Trump gave men permission to abuse and harass women. Those same men gave him their permission, through their votes.
Once he was in power, the pattern continued. Trump took to the stage to discredit and mock allegations of sexual assault made by Christine Blasey-Ford against his Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, who always denied the allegations. When Kavanaugh was appointed, fringe misogynistic groups celebrated online, with incels praising him for being a hero to their community. Ironically, Kavanaugh’s male supremacist cheerleaders didn’t believe his denials, they believed her accusations – and loved him for it.
On a legislative scale, Trump acted for his misogynistic base, presiding over the weakening protections for domestic abuse victims and victims of sexual harassment, and, of course, creating the anti-abortion Supreme Court which would end universal access to safe and legal abortion in the US.
Misogyny helped win Trump the Presidency, and god damn he was not going to let his boys down.
Obligatory book plug
Last week I mentioned that my author copies were on their way and what do you know, as soon as I sent my SubStack, they arrived!
You can pre-order copies from Verso and it comes out ONE MONTH TODAY OMGEEE.
You can also come and see me chat about the book and the culture wars with Leo Hollis and Owen Hatherley on 16 May at Bath Festivals.
Then there’s the launch at St George’s on 7 June, organised by Bristol Ideas.
And a panel with me, Paul Mason, Nick Lowles and Prof Madhu Krishnan on 12 June, also organised by Bristol Ideas.
Plus, discussions are going on for a London launch in June… watch this space… and a planned appearance at Clifton Literature Festival in November too.
What I’m writing
Nothing to share this week, but three major articles filed. I am hoping to have some very exciting writing news next Saturday if all goes to plan…
What I loved
I am focusing a lot on Ukraine at the moment and so this week’s reporting highlight comes from The Observer with Emma Graham-Harrison and Artem Mazhulin reporting from the Zaporizhzhia region,
‘We’ll show just how weak they are’: Ukraine primed for crucial offensive
What I’m reading
Not exactly reading but I went to see Deborah Levy speak about August Blue this week and she was electrifying. The privilege of being in the presence of such a mind! I read it in proof and it’s wonderful.
Currently reading It’s Our Turn To Eat by Michela Wrong about corruption in Kenya. Wrong really is one of the best writers on sub-Saharan Africa. Also I so so so so need to go back to Kenya.
(my pic from Kisumu, of Lake Victoria)
Golden age of detective fiction this week is Murder in Mesopotamia (which means I can’t stop singing the B-52s) and Peril at End House.
I really need to read a novel that is not a murder mystery… will be scouring the reviews pages this weekend to find some exciting fiction.
What I watched
My mum recommended Nelly and Nadine, a Storyville film about two women who fell in love in Ravensbrück, which is on BBC iPlayer. I was aware of Nadine Hwang from my long-standing fascination with lesbians living in 1920s Paris but not of this part of her story. It was so emotional.
Watching it inevitably led to me re-watching Aimee and Jaguar, another Holocaust lesbian love story.
That’s all for this week. Hope you have a lovely CORRIEBOBS or CORRYNASH or whatever you choose to call it.
If you like what I have to write about feminism, abortion rights, journalism, books and films, please subscribe. Tell your friends to subscribe! And I’ll be back next week with (hopefully!) big writing news.
Ciao ciao!