by
_____
Fiona Hill was preparing for the most high-stake assignment of her life.
On November 21, 2019, responding to a subpoena, the British-American foreign affairs specialist was called as a witness before a US House committee as part of the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.
The hearing would be live streamed. The eyes of the nation would be upon her. Her every word would be scrutinized.
In her new memoir, “There is Nothing for You Here: Finding Opportunity in the Twenty-First Century,” Hill opens with an anecdote that is unsurprising, yet depressing.
The nation’s security, the fate of the president, the future of diplomatic relations— Hill had a lot on her plate. But still, she had to contend with something utterly routine and ordinary: sexism.
The fate of the president, the future of diplomatic relations, the upcoming presidential election — Hill had a lot on her plate. But still, she had to contend with something utterly routine and ordinary: sexism.
Her communications advisor Molly Levinson, CEO of The Levinson Group, warned Hill that her appearance that day would be judged as much by how she looked as by what she said.
“For a woman in the spotlight,” Hill writes, “the self-presentation was ultimately as important as the substantive preparation. “
Levinson advised Hill to wear a dark suit, white top, and black pumps — otherwise she could very well appear in the next day’s fashion section of The Washington Post.
“For a woman in the spotlight, the self-presentation was ultimately as important as the substantive preparation.”
Levinson further warned Hill that the Congressional hearing room would be freezing. She told Hill “the air conditioning was cranked up and the temperature set low to accommodate congressmen in their layers of undershirts, dress shirts, and suit jackets so there would be no risk of sweaty armpits and brows beaded with perspiration.”
But if the cameras caught her shivering, it would convey nervousness and undermine her message. So Levinson had Hill practice pushing the balls of her feet into the floor to stop herself from shivering.
Then, on the morning of the testimony, Hill — who almost never wore makeup — was given a complete “prime-time makeover” from Michelle Obama’s former stylist.
Reading this right now, in the autumn of 2021, I find this a bitter pill.
Here was an accomplished professional, an official at the US National Security Council specializing in Russian and European affairs. She had a PhD in history from Harvard and spoke fluent Russian. She conducted research at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, the National Intelligence Council, and the Brookings Institution. She served as an intelligence analyst under Presidents Bush and Obama.
When called as a witness in the impeachment hearings, she was serving as deputy assistant to the President and senior director for European and Russian affairs on his National Security Council staff.
These dispiriting words make me wonder: At this stage of the game, is this the best we can do?
Yet there she was, thinking about something as mundane and yet utterly critical as her clothing and her appearance. A bitter pill indeed.
Hill feels so strongly about those events that she put them in the prologue of her book. As she says:
“I had struggled against sexism throughout my professional life in a seemingly unending effort to realize my potential and do my job effectively despite the difficulties that somehow seemed intrinsic to being female,” she writes.
“Nonetheless, I would never have thought that I would need to worry about my gender being a liability for me — and for the country — at such a critical moment.”
These dispiriting words make me wonder: At this stage of the game, is this the best we can do?
© Copyright 2021
________________________________
Want to talk? Reach me at dana@danarubin.com