It's the nightmarish scene that plays out in the minds of many women who are rape victims -- that if they took their allegations to court they would end up being the ones on trial, rather than the rapist.
I have to say it, even if nobody else wants to. I think we need to have a national conversation about how "we the people" have reacted to the alleged sexual assault of Nafissatou Diallo by Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
Nafissatou Diallo and her lead lawyer, Kenneth Thompson, have thrown all normal rules of professional conduct to the wind and decided instead to conduct their case in the manner of the famous showman, P.T. Barnum.
The Dominique Strauss Kahn affair is like a Rorschach test: it consists of pieces of information so conflicting, and hard to make sense of, that what people end up thinking about it is a reflection of the perspective they brought in the first place.
I don't know whether or not Dominique Strauss-Kahn sexually assaulted the hotel maid. But there seems to be enough questions that his guilt or innocence, as well as the credibility of the maid's accusations, should be decided in court by a jury.
Dominique Strauss-Kahn is accused of sexual attack on a hotel chambermaid. But will his status as the IMF head allow him to wriggle out from under criminal prosecution in New York by claiming immunity?
Is there any woman on the planet whose word, reputation and behavior is considered beyond reproach enough that she can accuse someone in power of assaulting her and have a real shot at being taken seriously?
No matter how many stories we hear about heterosexual men committing adultery and destroying their marriages, why is it that we continue to hear that it is LGBT people that are the greatest threat to the institution of marriage?
The DSK scandal so far has not driven a wedge between France and the US and not resuscitated the age-old reflexes of anti-Americanism. For those who tried to exploit it, it did not pay off. French anti-Americanism ain't what it used to be!