As the Sterling affair plays out, Demetria Lucas at The Root leaps to the defense of “gold diggers.” She does so in the context of V. Stiviano and the latter’s effort to cash in on her role as the companion of Donald Sterling, by means fair and foul. Good on her, says Lucas.
If your come-up plan is to chase men with cash and offer a fair exchange, so be it. But take lessons from Stiviano, who is playing chess, not checkers. She will wrap up this messy situation with a $1.8 million appreciating asset (the duplex) and at least a few million dollars in her account—in addition to the nearly quarter-million already sitting there—to buy her continued silence. She and Sterling both played. She’s about to get paid. Call her a gold digger all you want. But don’t say it like it’s a bad thing.
This is feminism in the 21st century? I would love to see Ms. Lucas debate Cathy Young and Gloria Steinem on this issue. Leave aside the repugnant moral implications of Lucas’ stance. Do any of us want out daughters to become professional lampreys? Is this how we want our nation to use the talents of its women? Is this the sort of point-of-view to which a distinguished scholar like Henry Louis Gates Jr. seeks to associate himself?