Self-described “lifelong Democrat” and feminist Camille Paglia excoriated Hillary Clinton in a recent interview with Free Beacon, where she said that the former presidential candidate “exploits feminism.” She also noted that misogyny did not play a single part in Clinton’s loss to President Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential election.
Paglia, an academic and social critic who has been a professor at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, Pa. since 1984, has long been a critic of Clinton.
When asked if misogyny played a role in Clinton’s loss, Paglia said, “Misogyny played no significant role whatever in Hillary Clinton’s two defeats as a presidential candidate. This claim is such a crock!”
Noting that Clinton’s presidential bid was a “gross exploitation of feminism,” Paglia said that Clinton spent her entire career “attached to her husband’s coattails.”
“Hillary was handed job after job but produced no tangible results in any of them — except of course for her destabilization of North Africa during her rocky tenure as secretary of state,” Paglia said. “And for all her lip service to women and children, what program serving their needs did Hillary ever conceive and promote? She routinely signed on to other people’s programs or legislative bills but spent the bulk of her time in fundraising and networking for her own personal ambitions.”
Paglia continued and said that Clinton’s blind eyes to her husband’s infidelity can also be attributed to a lack of “authentic feminism.”
“The hypocrisy of feminist leaders was on full display during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, which incontrovertibly demonstrated Bill Clinton’s gross violation of basic sexual harassment policy,” Paglia said. “Although I had voted for him twice, I was the only feminist at the time who publicly condemned Clinton for his squalid and unethical behavior with an intern whose life (it is now clear) he ruined. Gloria Steinem’s slick casuistry during that shocking episode did severe damage to feminism, from which it has never fully recovered.”
Paglia even took aim at Elizabeth Warren, who she called an “arrant hypocrite” for rubbing elbows with Clinton during the 2016 election, and voiced her disgust at the very idea of a Warren presidential run in 2020.
“Elizabeth Warren, a smug Harvard professor, is no populist,” Paglia said. “She craftily hid from sight throughout the primaries — until Hillary won the nomination. Then all of a sudden, there was bouncy, grinning Warren, popping in and out of Hillary’s Washington mansion as vice-presidential possibilities were being vetted. What an arrant hypocrite! Warren stands for nothing but Warren.”
In April 2016, Paglia tore into Clinton during the 2016 presidential debates, and blasted her for everything raging from her “abortion clinic”-chic fashion sense to her “compulsive money lust.”