Bill’s Victims

Vincent J. Curtis

10 Oct 2016

The photograph montage at the head of this morning’s Drudge Report certainly told an interesting story.  The picture showed a very sheepish and suspicious looking Bill Clinton glancing sideways towards four of the women he and Hillary victimized between 1975 and 2000.  Chelsea Clinton, with a sad and serious face, looked straight ahead.

What struck me about Bill’s women was how plain they all looked.  Sure, they are twenty years older than they were when their plight came to public attention, but even then none of them were ravishing beauties.  Of all of Bill’s women, only Gennifer Flowers was really good looking.  Bill tended to select women who were not good looking.  Even Hillary herself in the full bloom of youth was, with her uncompromising dentition, an acquired taste.  Given her waspish personality, I’ll bet Bill was the first guy who paid her any attention.

Why would Bill select plain-looking women for his attentions?  Perhaps because he thought he was more likely to get away with it.  Being plain, who would take seriously their accusations of sexual assault by Bill?  Perhaps also because they were all he could get.  The really good looking girls went for somebody else – better looking, more athletic, more elevated, more respectful, better genetics.  Bill wasn’t rich and famous then, and perhaps only Hillary was appreciative of his intellect.  It wasn’t until Bill was governor of Arkansas that Gennifer Flowers became a companion.

So Bill learned early on that his best chances were with plain looking women.  He also may have felt that he was a genetic loser.  He and Hillary had only one child – Chelsea.  And the story is that he and Hillary had only one child so that they could look somewhat normal as a couple, and that they did occasionally sleep together.

Deep in Bill’s psyche is the sense that he is a genetic loser; and he doesn’t want to be a loser.  Scoring with women is a way of proving to himself that he is not a loser.  If he was going to get a women, he had to choose one for whom attention from a male was uncommon.  He was more likely to be successful if the woman was charmed simply because some man notices her, and those women tend to be plain-looking.  He was also more likely to get away with a sexual assault because the woman may not mind it so much, being a novelty for her, what she thought she had to endure to keep Bill’s attention; was less likely to have defences against it because being molested might never have happened to her before.  Moreover, she was less likely to be believed if she started telling tales of Bill’s sexual aggression with her.  That no one would believe them was the starting basis of the defense against “Bimbo Eruptions” during Bill’s presidential campaign in 1992.  Hillary stood by her man in 1992, which added to the unlikelihood.

Anyhow, it was a fascinating psychological study to see Bill’s reaction to the presence of a good number of the women that Bill and Hillary victimized in various ways decades ago.

-30-