A person can be falsely accused of egregious behavior, such as sexual harassment, for which there is no proof. Likewise, a person can be sexually aggressive and get away with it—again, no proof. So is Presidential candidate Herman Cain a victim or the victimizer?
Do you believe the four women stating that they were sexually harassed by Mr. Cain are telling the truth? Can all the media frenzy be dismissed as a vast left-wing conspiracy or the clever ploy of a political opponent? Or is there a thread of truth bleeding through the twisted fabric of Herman Cain’s ever-changing storyline?
This story is time-worn. A public figure caught in some impropriety vehemently denies all his accusers and experiences a convenient lapse of memory. With mounting media pressure, the story is dribbled out in conflicting pieces and carefully parsed explanations. Storytelling on-the-fly with no believable plot in mind. The accusers are dismissed for their personal failings and hidden agendas. Finally, cornered, the man tearfully admits his deceit and wrongdoing. I only say man because all of the recent stories in the news have been men, but I’m sure this old shoe will fit women too.
So you have to ask yourself, whether reader or writer, what makes someone think they can rewrite their past history to make it conform to the image they want projected to the world? Does the mind conveniently subvert the truth and wipe out inconvenient facts so that the person’s psyche can escape guilt? Or do people just believe they are clever enough to really get away with it?
Accusations, guilt, and denial. This is the stuff of which good stories are made. I have a feeling we will get no tears from Herman Cain. He thinks he can manage his way out of this one.
Oh, and one last niggling question--why are Cain's supposed victims, the ones who have come forward, all attractive, intelligent blonds?