>>>>>I should also mention that I thought Anita Hill was far more believable than Thomas.
>>>>
>>>>Me too.
>>>>
>>>>There is a strange thing with women in the U.S. though. Most often, a woman's greatest critics are other women.
>>>
>>>Such is the world. We expect women to bring change, to bring a different way of thinking and doing things in politics (and elsewhere). But for a woman to climb up the ladder, she first has to master the masculine art of climbing... and lose much of her feminine mind along the way, replacing it with climber's skills. Women in the audience are the first to notice what's wrong.
>>>
>>>Eventually they may build sufficient critical mass to change the rules of the game so even normal people can be in politics. I do hope so, or else entropy.
>>
>>Women movement is no different when it comes to being with their own kind. Women's movement is for liberal women only. If your outside of their fense, they have no mercy. Same with blacks. If you're black and run with the Republican crowd, you're an uncle tom or worse.
>
>If you're American and leftist (I mean, left from what's called left here), or Polish but not Catholic, or colonial but gone native, or Jewish but disagreeing with policy of Israel, or Palestinian but agreeing with the Israeli neighbors, or were a communist between the 1920s and 1950s but disagreed with Stalin, you're black sheep as well, there's nothing new. Intolerance makes politics. It's also a way to keep the ideas from being diluted.
>
>BTW, what would you do if you were Spartacus, and found a fellow slave who'd say "master is good"?

Keep it simpler. What if you are just a murderer among normal people? It seems to be another victim of intolerance in your books.