The tale is one familiar to anyone who has attended graduate school: a graduate student claims to have been coerced into an uncomfortable relationship with a star professor. What is less familiar, but not unheard of, is that the professor is a woman (noted feminist Avital Ronell) and the former graduate student is a man (Nimrod Reitman).
As would be expected, the scenario followed the usual playbook for #MeToo incidents. First, associates of Ronell stepped in to defend her by pointing out her positive qualities and appealing to her standing in the academic community. These are, as always, irrelevant to whether a person did or did not engage in harassment. Second, Reitman was blamed and cast as a villain. Echoing all-too-common charges, her defenders accused Reitman of leading Ronell on, waiting too long to make his accusations, and so on. As the defenders of women accusers have repeatedly pointed out, these tactics are unacceptable. Consistency requires that the same standards be applied when a man is an accuser. As such, the accusations against Ronell should have been taken as seriously as any accusation made by a woman against a prominent male professor. That said, there are some who might disagree with this view.
It could be contended that since Ronell is a woman, she really could not sexually harass a man. After all, men can easily resist women, and some might go so far as to claim that men are always happy to have the attention of a woman.
Sexual harassment is not about simply about physical power, but about a general disparity in power. While men tend to occupy the positions of power, a woman in such a position can use that power against the men beneath her. Given Ronell’s position and status, she enjoyed a considerable advantage over Reitman. In general terms, any disparity of power allows for the greater potential of sexual harassment, regardless of whether a man or a woman has the upper hand.
In terms of men always enjoying the attention of women, that is clearly not true. In cases in which the attention is inflicted, men are even less likely to enjoy this attention. For the most part, men at work or at school most likely want to do their jobs or engage in their education without being harassed by their bosses or professors. As such, the idea that men cannot be harassed is absurd.
One might also try to defend Ronell by pointing out that she is a famous feminist and that the values of feminism preclude such bad behaviour. It is, of course, easy enough to reply to this defense. While I will focus on feminism as the defense, the points I make can apply to almost any defense that a person could not harass because they profess certain values.
While most varieties of feminism do include a condemnation of using power to coerce people in a sexual context, there could be versions that do not address this in the case of men. Since it is possible to craft any sort of theory, there could even be a form of feminism in which this behavior is acceptable—but this would certainly be a morally problematic theory. While holding to such a view would explain a person’s behavior, it would hardly defend it. That is, saying that what a person did was not wrong because they do not think it is wrong would not be very effective as a defense.
One obvious fact about professing values is that one can do so without subscribing to those values. There are many reasons why people engage in such a deceit, such as wishing to appear to be a certain sort of person for an advantage. For example, a person might profess the values of feminism as part of fitting in and advancing in an academic climate that values and rewards professing this view. Obviously enough, a person who merely professes the values of feminism without subscribing to them could easily act in violation of those values. As such, mere expression of values does not show that a person could not have engaged in harassment.
Another obvious fact is that even those who subscribe to a set of values do not always act in accord with those values. People often find it too hard to do what they believe they should do or too easy to do what they think is wrong. For example, I accept that eating meat produced by factory farms is morally wrong, yet I still eat such meat. In the case of feminism, a person could accept the view that people should not be coerced and harassed in a sexual context yet fail to live up to that principle. They might be overcome with desire or subject to some other factors that enables them to act against their own principles.
People can also act in wilful ignorance by rationalizing their violations of their own principles or by refusing to see these violations for what they are. For example, what the victim perceives as harassment and coercion might be seen by the harasser as a consensual relationship. It is, to be fair, possible that a person is not engaged in wilful ignorance, but simple ignorance. That is, they are honestly unaware that they are engaged in what they would regard as bad behavior. For example, I accidentally fed a vegan friend a vegetarian burger that contained whey protein (milk) because I had no idea that it contained milk. As such, I did something wrong—but only because I had no idea about the milk. Returning to the case at hand, the professor might have been unaware of how the student felt—which leads to a broad and controversial area of accountability for knowing things and the division of responsibility. In the case of power disparities, there can be special problem—the person in the weaker position can be worried to say what they feel and thus the person with the greater power would not know. This is, of course, why it is generally not good for people in positions of power to have relationships with those under them, such as graduate students.
While this case is not the first incident of a woman found to have sexually harassed a man, it is also not going to be the last. While the #MeToo movement is, once again, bringing sexual harassment into the media spotlight there is the fact that women are entering more positions of power and that the old gender roles and expectations are changing. As such, we should expect an increase in the reporting of cases of men being sexually harassed by women. And, as has been the case with men, we should expect to see some of the accused women profess values that are contrary to engaging in such behavior.
In my view, this is one of those topics for which all discussion, all nuance, all consideration of “exceptions” is unnecessary. If someone in a position of power over another individual uses that power in inappropriate ways – i.e., to gain sexual favors, for example, that is harassment and it is illegal. Whether or not the aggressor is a famous female feminist or a monumental male movie mogul does not mean a thing.
To say that “women cannot harass men” for any reason is like saying “there’s no such thing as racism against white people”.
We’ve had this discussion at length in previous posts about consistency, and I’ve written pretty extensively on it so I won’t repeat myself – but harassment, discrimination, racism, abuse – all of these things are examples of bad behavior (to put a generic umbrella over it) and it doesn’t matter if the perpetrator is male, female, QUILTBAG, white, black or other. Nor do any of these things matter as they may matter to the victim.
When events like the one you cite are “spun” in the way they are, with exceptions and excuses being brought forward, it casts a particular hypocritical political patina over the situation which is (and I keep coming back to this example …) Orwellian in nature. If feminists, for example, “own” the issue of harassment, it is a politically powerful position. When men come forward and claim that they, too, are victims, it waters down the political impact. Same with racism – if African Americans can “own” racism, they have a strong political voice that is watered down considerably when others, especially white males, claim that they have been discriminated against based on their race.
We now live in a Culture of Victimhood:
“victimhood has now become a protected class in our society, a trend fed by well-intended, but potentially harmful, therapists, activists and daytime talk shows.”
It has become less of a matter of ideological consistency and more a matter of political advantage.
“…there is the fact that women are entering more positions of power and that the old gender roles and expectations are changing. As such, we should expect an increase in the reporting of cases of men being sexually harassed by women.”
That’s a good point – but I think it is a little broader than that. There have been plenty of women in powerful positions for decades now; I think part of the reason for the increase in reporting is that it is becoming more mainstream, less shameful for a man to admit to having been sexually harassed. I believe this has been going on for a long time.
There are many opinions about this – the fact is that between 2010-2017, 15%-20%, of complaints filed with the EEOC were by men who claimed to have been harassed by women. Many believe that this number does not accurately represent the true number of incidents; that most cases go unreported.
“Some men may not report their harassment or file a claim with the EEOC because they are afraid of being mocked by coworkers. They may believe that men can’t truly be sexually harassed by a woman, or that being harassed by another man implicates their own sexuality. They may fear being embarrassed if details of the harassment were leaked, particularly if they believe that they should be able to handle the issue themselves. Whatever the reason, it is evident that many men are simply not filing claims of sexual harassment.
I think there’s another reason, though – and it’s the same reason that women have not been so forthcoming in the past. It’s a matter of support – or, going back to my original point, “political power”. Without the backing of a strong feminist movement and the groundswell of support by the general public, I think women felt that reporting incidents of harassment would be more trouble than it was worth, and that their protestations would be unheeded.
I think the same is the case for men – aside from the implications this might have on their own sexuality or the embarrassment they may feel, there simply isn’t the same kind of “clout” as there is with the roles reversed. And that’s real power.
It does make sense that harassment would be under-reported, especially by men. Another factor in play might be that men feel less threatened by unwanted advances by women.
…”men feel less threatened by unwanted advances by women”
Maybe. I think harassment is like trees falling in the forest – an attempt at harassment on someone who is not threatened by it is bad behavior, but there’s not really a victim unless there are consequences.
Forexample, if my female dean makes advances toward me, and upon my rejection of those advancements (because I am not threatened by her) she gives me an awful schedule, or denies me a raise or promotion, or does not approve a project or travel – that would constitute workplace hostility and retaliation that would definitely fall under Title IX.
My understanding of the law/rule is that if I “feel” threatened or harassed by her, that’s enough of a consequence to bring charges – but if I don’t and that’s as far as it goes, well, as you point out – no victim.
On another topic – there is an error in my post with a runaway HTML tag for the hyperlink. I checked it on my end and it’s correct – but in looking at the source there seems to be an extra in there for some reason. Is it possible for you to correct that? It’s kind of a mess.
If not, maybe you can just remove it and I’ll try reposting it. I have all the text.
Thanks.
YIKES! My mere reference to the tag is another tag! Can you tell that HTML coding is not my forte?
And no mention that the woman is supposedly a lesbian and the guy is gay? Gay enough to be married to another man. And he climbs into bed with her. And she places his hands on her breasts…
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/13/nyregion/sexual-harassment-nyu-female-professor.html
Yeah. Supposedly. Media whores all around if you ask me. There’s never a Sweet Meteor of Death around when the universe really needs one.
It’s all nonsense. I was forced to give my grandmother a peck on the cheek when I was 12. Am I a victim?
Consider yourself fortunate. McNab Elementary School, playground, 3rd grade, one little girl named Diana, AKA Diana Bananna, was responsible for the vast majority of the cootie shots dispensed that year.
Serious nonsense. “The problems began…before he officially started school…”
The problems began, according to Mr. Reitman, in the spring of 2012, before he officially started school. Professor Ronell invited him to stay with her in Paris for a few days. The day he arrived, she asked him to read poetry to her in her bedroom while she took an afternoon nap, he said.
“That was already a red flag to me,” said Mr. Reitman. “But I also thought, O.K., you’re here. Better not make a scene.”
Then, he said, she pulled him into her bed.
“She put my hands onto her breasts, and was pressing herself — her buttocks — onto my crotch,” he said. “She was kissing me, kissing my hands, kissing my torso.” That evening, a similar scene played out again, he said.
He confronted her the next morning, he said.
“I said, look, what happened yesterday was not O.K. You’re my adviser,” he recalled in an interview.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/13/nyregion/sexual-harassment-nyu-female-professor.html?nl=top-stories&nlid=53670172ries&ref=cta
Yeah, I kind of covered that above. SMOD time. Can’t be long now.
This seems like nothing after the lesbian assaulting the gay man story, but WTH…
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/19/us/asia-argento-assault-jimmy-bennett.html