The Freedom Bulletin

Photo by Philippe Grangeaud, via the Socialist Party on Flickr

Now that Dominique Strauss-Kahn is getting ready to return to France after his trials and tribulations in New York, I thought I would give my final thoughts on him, his case, and the public’s reaction to it.

The word “hero” is a pretty strong word. Dominique Strauss-Kahn did not choose to be falsely accused of rape. He has never (that I know of) risked his life for his principles or made any grand speeches about freedom or defendants’ rights. I don’t even agree with most of his political views. But I do consider him a hero of sorts.

Let me note first that he was not actually declared innocent of the charges of criminal sexual acts, attempted rape, sexual abuse, forcible touching, and unlawful imprisonment which were dismissed last week. But after reading all the publicly available information about the case, not only do I think there is not enough evidence to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but I believe that he is innocent. I also believe that the District Attorney dismissed the charges not because of his power and influence but simply because they investigated and found unexpected flaws in their case. Law enforcement and prosecutors pursued him so zealously when the allegations first surfaced that, contrary to what many people think, they were clearly not giving him preferential treatment or looking for an excuse to drop the case.

DSK is certainly a martyr, someone who has suffered wrongly. He was arrested, spent five days in jail, and was made to undergo invasive and degrading examinations. He lost his job as the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, as well as his chance to become president of France. While under house arrest, he spent $200,000 a month for court-ordered security, as well as huge sums of money for lawyers, private investigators, and rent. Law enforcement, his accuser’s legal team, and the media collaborated to inflict horrific damage to his reputation.

Far too many in the media, the public, and initially, the D.A.’s office, seized upon this case as a chance to make a point about gender, race, and class. They saw hotel maid Nafissatou Diallo – a poor African immigrant and single mother – as the perfect victim, and considered DSK – rich, white, and influential – the perfect person to tear down. Despite the presumption of innocence that is the foundation of America’s legal system, countless people assumed that Strauss-Kahn was guilty, mentioning the prosecution’s burden of proof, if they bothered to mention it at all, as a mere formality, with no actual meaning. To give a few examples:

• Maureen Dowd at the New York Times described Diallo as a “hard-working, God-fearing, young widow” and DSK as “a crazed, rutting, wrinkly old satyr charging naked out of a bathroom, lunging at her and dragging her around the room, caveman-style.”
• Andrea Peyser at the New York Post called all foreign nationals “decadent…depraved…malodorous, greedy, drunk and demented…scofflaws and alleged rapists..petty criminals and those who commit crimes of passion, opportunity or sheer boredom…egotistical scum unfit to lick one’s shoe.” Then she called the entire country of France “cowardly and decayed.’
• Jimmy Breslin at the NY Daily News claimed that Strauss-Kahn must have been thinking, ”Look at this, girls, chippies, pigeons, whatever you call them – just look at them, they should serve me and instead they want to blow my life away in the daily news everywhere.”
• The Daily News splashed the headline “Le Perv” across the front of their paper and made that into DSK’s nickname.
• Mary Wentworth at Cape Cod Today accused DSK of having ”a history of criminal activity,” characterized his brief affair with a fellow IMF employee in 2008 as “rape,” and suggested that his best defense is to plead insanity.
• “Manhattan Madam” Kristin Davis wrote that DSK ”has very clearly abused a female employee at the hotel” and exposed him as an alleged customer of her business because “I will no longer protect the men who abuse women.” She later calls him a “sexual predator” and “sexual deviant.”
• Dozens of maids were bused in by their unions to chant “Shame on you” at his arraignment.
• In a column titled, “Let’s keep womanisers out of office,” the Guardian‘s Viv Groskop equates all promiscuous men (but apparently not promiscuous women) with sexual predators and calls them “rutting foxes.”
• Self-professed “feminist” Gail Dines claimed (before Diallo made her identity public), ”Only in a porn culture could we take seriously the idea that what transpired between Strauss-Kahn and the unnamed woman was consensual.”
• A Black Star News editorial repeatedly puts the word “consensual” in quotes to ridicule DSK’s defense and again and again makes snide comments about his looks. Doris Allimadi at the same publication calls DSK a “serial woman molester” and a “misogynist” and accuses him, with no basis in fact, of “forcing himself” on the above-mentioned IMF employee.
• Even when he was cleared of the charges, people held up signs calling him a rapist and chanted “DSK, you must pay” and “DSK, you’re a sick bastard and your wife is even sicker.”
• Stephen Glover at the Daily Mail dismisses any harm DSK may have suffered in this ordeal and brands him a “chauvinist sexual predator,” a “chauvinist monster,” and a “rutting bear.”
• National Post commentator Barbara Kay says, ”Nobody disputes that…some form of sexual aggression against the maid occurred…DSK’s attitude to women seems to be the sexual equivalent of a slave-owner’s to blacks. He just doesn’t get the fact that women have rights and are not inferior beings put on earth for the sole purpose of satisfying his inordinate sexual needs.”
• The Telegraph‘s Allison Pearson calls him a ”priapic bully” and “swaggering silverback primate.”
• Finally, former French prime minister Michel Rocard says that DSK suffers from “medical problems” and “quite obviously has a mental illness.”

All of these people acted like bullies by ganging up on an easy target and kicking a man who was down. They should be ashamed of themselves and should apologize to Strauss-Kahn.

Strauss-Kahn, remarkably, said both to his former IMF colleagues and through his biographer that he has no hard feelings toward the American legal system because it reached the right result in the end. For having to put up with all this abuse, and maintaining dignity and class throughout his ordeal, DSK qualifies as a hero. His wife, Anne Sinclair, does as well for the loyalty and courage that she showed by sticking by him. They are both honorable and fascinating people, and I will continue to update the blog from time to time with the latest in DSK’s still pending legal cases, his life, and his career.

Finally, here are some good editorials, articles, and opinions about DSK that I’ve found over the past few months:

• Naomi Wolf: A tale of two rape charges
• Bob Barr: In French or English, Strauss-Kahn Being Railroaded
• Theo Willem: Dominique Strauss-Kahn Vs The American Anti-Male Justice System
• Alan Dershowitz: The Trouble With Rape Prosecutions
• Toby Young: The Strauss-Kahn case shames the city of New York
• Michael T. Bucci: The world suddenly changes for Strauss-Kahn
• Nathan Austin: Too Quick to Indict (letter to the editor)
• Michael Gaynor: Reverse racism and Democrat DA’s in celebrity cases
• Stephen W. Grafman: Courtroom media circus
• Roy Black: Why we should protect those accused of rape
• Cathy Young: The noble lie, feminist style
• Jon Friedman: Dear DSK, we blew it
• Paul Toohey: The lynch mob mentality
• Lucy Wadham: DSK case exposes rift between feminists
• Allison Joyce: A night out with Strauss-Kahn (not an editorial but pretty cute)

Photo by Stephen Jaffe/IMF

Andrea Peyser at the New York Post seems to have something against not only Dominique Strauss-Kahn, but also his wife, Anne Sinclair. Because Sinclair has stood by her husband through all his trials and tribulations, Peyser calls her a “dingbat” and a  ”pathetic doormat” (more than once) and asks “If he could possibly respect her…Can any man respect a woman who allows herself to be used, and reused, like a wrinkled Kleenex?”

As someone who has, admittedly, only been watching this case in the media, I have a lot of respect for Anne Sinclair, and I would imagine Strauss-Kahn does as well. He did publicly thank her after his charges were dismissed, saying, “I am most deeply grateful to my wife and family who have gone through this ordeal with me.”

In addition to being the wife of DSK, Sinclair is a famous journalist in her own right, as well as the granddaughter of Picasso’s art dealer. The two were married in 1991 when they were about 42 years old, and they have no children together, although both have children from previous marriages. Although DSK has a well-deserved reputation for being a womanizer, he has, to his credit, been honest about this to the public and to his wife – warning her before they got married that he was an “incorrigible skirt chaser” - and she doesn’t seem to mind too much. Over the years, Sinclair used her wealth to help finance her husband’s political career and purchase various expensive homes for them to live in, and she came to his rescue when he was arrested in New York, posting his $5 million bail and finding a luxurious townhouse for him to stay at while under house arrest. She has been perhaps his most stalwart supporter, proclaiming his innocence when he was first arrested, appearing at his side at every court hearing, and voicing her anger at the people who turned their backs on him.

I don’t see what’s wrong with any of this. Many people look down on Strauss-Kahn because of his numerous affairs, and possibly also because his and Sinclair’s relationship does not fit the popular (and anti-feminist) ideal that a man should protect and provide for his wife. Successful in her own right and much wealthier than her husband, she seems to love and accept him the way he is, regardless of what the public thinks of him. In other words, she seems to think for herself instead of submitting to society’s ideas of what men and women should be like.

I’m not sure why Peyser equates this with being a “pathetic doormat” and “allowing herself to be used.” Would it be better to mindlessly go along with what society tells women they should value in a man? Quite the contrary. Anne Sinclair is a very admirable person. She is more of a feminist than the hordes of people who automatically condemned Strauss-Kahn as a rapist, and far more intelligent, classy, and respectable than a mean-spirited tabloid columnist like Andrea Peyser.