Allegations of “toxic masculinity,” sexist by their very nature, constitute a popular way of getting even by radical feminists. The ugly head of sexism has been raised once again. In a shocking case that just hit the airwaves, Bill O’Reilly of O’Reilly Factor—the most popular figure on cable news—is the latest casualty on the altar of feminist rage. O’Reilly has just been fired from Fox News after a series of accusations of sexual harassment.
None of the accusations has been litigated. Several suits over a period of years are alleged to have been settled to the tune of $13 million. That does not prove any of the allegations was truthful. It only means that Fox and O’Reilly decided it was less disruptive to settle the cases. O’Reilly has denied the truth of all charges.
The latest accusation of toxic masculinity was from a woman who claimed that O’Reilly promised to take her to dinner and then reneged. What is the old saw about a woman scorned? Many phony campus rape allegations have turned out to be from women whose attentions were rebuffed. This could be a similar situation. The accusation is amplified because O’Reilly is alleged to have advised the woman to show “more cleavage.” Another woman, who chooses to remain anonymous, says O’Reilly called her “hot chocolate.” This presumably was a reference to her race. Introducing the race card only makes O’Reilly look worse in the eyes of a public that has been trained to respond emotionally to specific cues relating to “social justice.”
What do you think? Does it add up to a convincing case? Should a successful man’s career be destroyed because he called a woman “hot chocolate?” Or because he advised a woman to show more cleavage? It really sounds ridiculous, especially when compared to allegations of actual physical assault that were leveled at President Bill Clinton. Clinton, a liberal, received a pass but O’Reilly, a conservative, is being judged by a different standard. Unfortunately, we have reached a place in our political history where the strategy of the Left is to launch personal attacks against right-wing adversaries. We have reached a place in our social history where witch hunts are a regular feature and public figures can be brought down by malicious rumors.
O’Reilly’s attorney has responded with a statement to CNN that reads: “It is outrageous that an allegation from an anonymous person about something that purportedly happened a decade ago is being treated as fact, especially when there is an obviously orchestrated campaign by activists and lawyers to destroy Mr. O’Reilly and enrich themselves through publicity driven donations.”
In the absence of concrete evidence, I can only conclude that Bill O’Reilly is no more guilty of sexual harassment than Donald Trump after the latter made some silly off-the-record comments about consensual sex with women. Both of them were convicted in the courts of political correctness and male bashing. Trump managed to survive the attack because the voters didn’t buy it. O’Reilly, as a conservative caught in the crosshairs of the liberal-controlled media, was not so lucky.
According The New York Times, Mr. O’Reilly’s contract with Fox contained a clause that he could be dismissed if the company was made aware of other allegations against him or if new ones arose. It did not stipulate that the allegations had to be proven. Any woman with a grudge against O’Reilly and knowledge of his contract terms could take him down with a mere allegation. Given the intensity of feminist anger together with hatred aimed at O’Reilly from the liberal mainstream media, a scenario in which he was deliberately targeted is not hard to imagine.
Until more substantial evidence of serious wrongdoing is brought out into the open, we should stop short of condemning O’Reilly.
**
Ed Brodow is a negotiation expert, political commentator, and author of In Lies We Trust: How Politicians and the Media Are Deceiving the American Public.
