Anita Hill Sexual Violence #MeToo Aristotle Enthymeme Endoxa Ethos Clarence Thomas Supreme Court Democrats Republicans Dr. Christine Blasey Ford Brett Kavanaugh Rhetoric Public Discourse Syllogism Feminism Intersectionality
Abstract:
This thesis examines the discourses about sexual violence from Anita Hill in 1991 to the Kavanaugh Hearings in 2018. By examining the changes in rhetoric, we are able to understand if the #MeToo movement in 2018 had an influence on systematic change for survivors of sexual violence. The analysis of the questioning of victims of sexual assault and the politics that surround their testimony will allow us to understand why women who come forward with serious allegations of sexual misconduct are treated horrendously in the public sphere. In order to interpret the public attitudes and discourse in the Anita Hill and Kavanaugh Hearings, I use an Aristotelian rhetorical framework that includes ethos, enthymeme’s, and endoxa. The Aristotelian rhetorical theory is essential for understanding the patriarchal norms in the public sphere. Throughout my analysis, I show that there were no radical changes from the Anita Hill Hearings to the Kavanaugh Hearings. Even though the #MeToo movement changed public knowledge about sexual violence, the attacks on victims stayed the same. In conclusion, I hope this thesis will allow readers to better understand how to invent a better system for addressing serious allegations of sexual misconduct against powerful men.
