While it’s a little inane that Time magazine still even publishes a Person of the Year, the issue itself always seems to create discourse and often, whether we like it or not, reflects the previous year. Never has that been more true with this year’s decision to announce a collective group of women — the “Silence Breakers” — to enjoy that honor. The move is at once political, dichotomous, and yet at the same time shows some progress.
Time’s story is detailed and measured, demonstrating how the movement, at least as it relates to the accusations against Weinstein, began with actress Ashley Judd, and continued with Rose McGowan. Time profiles dozens of other women, and a few men, who they interviewed over the course of six weeks whose age, race, occupations, and other characteristics varied. Yet all their stories of harassment all shared similar, eery common denominators.
In almost every case, they described not only the vulgarity of the harassment itself — years of lewd comments, forced kisses, opportunistic gropes — but also the emotional and psychological fallout from those advances. Almost everybody described wrestling with a palpable sense of shame. Had she somehow asked for it? Could she have deflected it? Was she making a big deal out of nothing?
I’m glad Time, of all publications, chose to profile women who were both “average” and famous. On the cover, I only recognized a couple faces. They seemed dedicated to actually telling the stories of women who have suffered abuse, harassment, and rape, regardless if it’s Taylor Swift, multi-platinum singer/songwriter, or Adama Iwu, a lobbyist.
That said, it’s interesting to see who Time did not include in such an expansive profile. One wonders if the exclusions were purposeful. For example, Huffington Post journalist Yashar Ali expressed disappointment that Time did not include Gretchen Carlson as one of the brave women who spoke up against the sexual harassment she received while at Fox News. It was actually that story, and her incredible courage to tell it, which occurred well before any news broke about Weinstein and others. That glaring gap seemed too obvious not to be purposeful — why would Time leave her out? Could it be her politics? One would hope not.
Some people are criticizing Time for profiling the women and instead, are saying the accused, the abusers, need to be named more. I disagree. The accusers, much like other high-profile criminals, always get the limelight. Whether they are innocent or guilty, we all know the name Harvey Weinstein, Roy Moore, Al Franken, Kevin Spacey, Louis C.K., or John Conyers — in part due to their previously held positions and in part due to the accusations against them. While many women who come forward desire to remain anonymous — and understandably so — their courage and bravery should be applauded. The last thing victims need in a scenario like this is to see Weinstein’s face plastered all over Time.
So while I wish Time would have thrown politics out the window and given Carlson her due accolades, the fact that they eschewed the obvious choice — President Trump — for women who’ve been silenced, scorned, shamed, and ridiculed, some for decades, speaks volumes.
Nicole Russell is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. She is a journalist in Washington, D.C., who previously worked in Republican politics in Minnesota. She was the 2010 recipient of the American Spectator’s Young Journalist Award.
If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions here.
