nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Female sexual harassers and double standards

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

When a man is found guilty of sexual harassment, women expect other men to join in unilateral condemnation of his actions.

The logic doesn't seem to work the other way, though, as seen in the case of Avital Ronell, a professor of German and Comparative Literature at New York University, who has been found responsible, after an internal university investigation, of systematically sexually harassing a male former PhD student, Nimrod Reitman, over a period of three years.

Reitman stated that Ronell repeatedly kissed and touched him, slept in his bed with him, asked him to lie in her bed, held his hand, constantly texted, emailed and called him, addressed him by pet names including "spaniel cock-er," and refused to work with him if he did not reciprocate. We all know what would happen if a male professor did these things to a female student.

But how did Ronell's female colleagues respond to the news? A group of them sent a letter to NYU, defending Ronell and trying to smear her accuser. The signatories include a number of top feminist professors, among them Judith Butler, author of the well-known book Gender Trouble. "“We have all seen [Ronell's] relationship with students, and some of us know the individual who has waged this malicious campaign against her,” they wrote.

There's a blatant double standard here. If women expect men to support them when they accuse powerful men of sexual harassment, they should also be willing to support male victims after a powerful woman has been found guilty. But they don't. Instead, they turn on the man and attack him, accusing him of waging a "malicious campaign."

So much for #MeToo.

New York Times story here.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

RWCNT

Santos Square Extinguisher wrote: »

RWCNT wrote: »

People defend abusers all the time.

Maybe you don't see the irony of feminist professors who have built their careers decrying the patriarchy and the oppression of women now circling the wagons to defend a sexual harasser.

Maybe they think she's innocent? I unfortunately don't see a link between "decrying the patriarchy and the oppression of women" and defending someone you believe to be innocent of sexual harassment that's substantial enough to invoke a sense of irony either.

In fairness though, I'm not actually familiar with any of these professor's work - I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are, and that you're not just aping on lazy, misinformed generalisations about feminist academics.

valoren

The old deflection of why did you take so long to report it is being invoked. Clearly her enablers fail to consider the 'there and then' circumstances. Nimrod knew he was being exploited and manipulated while still a student under a professor who was harassing him. He was clearly intelligent enough to realize that if he complained 'there and then' i.e. while he was still her grad student, that she had the power and influence to wreck his career. A letter of disapproval or whatever machination's such universities use would have destroyed his prospects. An abuser will exploit that lack of power. It is only when the victim escapes that influence, which in Nimrod's case was to graduate and secure a career path that the professor's influence became redundant and then after that period of time can it be reported. So to say he waited for so long to even say anything in order to attack his credibility is a cop out and displays a stark lack of insight into what those who are abused 'there and then' experience failing to empathise with that feeling of being incapable of doing anything about the abuse.

Outlaw Pete

The amount of absolute nonsense on this thread. Users just attacking the OP and engaging in other deflective nonsense just because they don't like the thread topic.

Anyway, was reading about this case here yesterday and thought this summed it up pretty well:

Diane Davis, chair of the department of rhetoric at the University of Texas-Austin, who also signed the letter to the university supporting Professor Ronell, said she and her colleagues were particularly disturbed that, as they saw it, Mr. Reitman was using Title IX, a feminist tool, to take down a feminist.

In the minds of purported feminists, Title IX is no law protecting against sex discrimination in academia, but a “feminist tool.”

“I am of course very supportive of what Title IX and the #MeToo movement are trying to do, of their efforts to confront and to prevent abuses, for which they also seek some sort of justice,” Professor Davis wrote in an email. “But it’s for that very reason that it’s so disappointing when this incredible energy for justice is twisted and turned against itself, which is what many of us believe is happening in this case.”

For those who claim the mantle of “justice,” it’s justice for them, not for anyone else. When one of their own gets caught dirty, it’s justice “twisted and turned against itself,” for justice is what these feminists want from others, not what they do to others.

pjohnson

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Are you not the one raising concerns about bullying a few days ago?

Bullying is ok sometimes. Just dont mention overweight people.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

RWCNT wrote: »

Maybe they think she's innocent?

Yes, despite the findings of an official university investigation, they are insisting that she is innocent.

They claim in their letter that "the allegations against her do not constitute actual evidence, but rather support the view that malicious intention has animated and sustained this legal nightmare."

Consider this -- would these feminist professors be demanding "actual evidence" if a female student claimed that a male professor had grabbed her breasts and kissed her against her will? Would they be insisting that she was motivated by "malicious intention"? No -- they would be demanding that he be fired on the spot.

The former student did turn over years' worth of emails and texts from the professor, that I'm sure was taken into account as "actual evidence" to substantiate his claims -- but it's easy to ignore that when trying to smear his character.

[Deleted User]

Someone get LLMMLL..

[Deleted User]

Grayson wrote:

Believe it or not women are not a homogenous group represented by the women in that story. Probably doesn't matter though since the OP has taken one example and decided that "women" have double standards. I think it says more about them rather than "women"

Oh the irony...

Grayson

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The amount of absolute nonsense on this thread. Users just attacking the OP and engaging in other deflective nonsense just because they don't like the thread topic.

To be fair the OP made loads of blanket statements about women and how women have double standards. It's clear that their point was that women are bad and don't care if a man is harassed/abused.

valoren

Considering the Professor was a lesbian I wonder would 'she be accorded the dignity rightly deserved by someone of her international standing and reputation' if she did the same to a female student?

Grayson

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh the irony...

why? Some women will have double standards. Some won't. Some will be lovely people. Some will be horrible.

I assume you're saying it's ironic because I made a blanket statement about women saying they are not all the same.
You do realise that saying that women are not all the same is not the same as saying that women have double standards.

PlaneSpeeking

valoren wrote: »

Considering the Professor was a lesbian I wonder would 'she be accorded the dignity rightly deserved by someone of her international standing and reputation' if she did the same to a female student?

Nah they'd spin some crap about embracing her fluid sexuality.

[Deleted User]

Grayson wrote: »

I assume you're saying it's ironic because I made a blanket statement about women saying they are not all the same.
You do realise that saying that women are not all the same is not the same as saying that women have double standards.

Apologies. I genuinely got you confused with another poster who was posting in a different thread not too long ago who constantly made blanket statements about men. I realise that it wasn't you.

Feisar

Santos Square Extinguisher wrote: »

Eh?

Where did I say that female victims of sexual harassment don't deserve support?

Of course they do. But male victims also deserve support. The double standards are very evident in this case, because these feminist professors would be the first to attack any male accused of harassing a woman. But when the victim is a man, they attack him.

I don't think female harassment has the same severity attached to it.

Cilantro2000

Grayson wrote: »

No it's not. Unless you're talking to their tits.

Or talking to a man's groin which women often do.

El_Duderino 09

I would have said it shows equality of treatment for the victim and how easily people ignore things they don’t want to see.

In all cases people will try to smear the victim, make it their fault, or say they knew exactly what they were doing all along and diminish responsibility for the perpetrator. Think the Belfast rape trial for example.

The victim always gets this treatment whether a man or woman. It’s the defence’s job to muddy the waters.

I’m just glad the perpetrator was brought to justice. Fair play to the lad who brought the complaint and put up with all the scrutiny that a victim tends to be put through.

PlaneSpeeking

Feisar wrote: »

I don't think female harassment has the same severity attached to it.

And there's the double standard.

Cilantro2000

Grayson wrote: »

To be fair the OP made loads of blanket statements about women and how women have double standards. It's clear that their point was that women are bad and don't care if a man is harassed/abused.

I think you're projecting, I haven't seen any evidence in this thread that anyone thinks "women are bad".

DEFTLEFTHAND

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The amount of absolute nonsense on this thread. Users just attacking the OP and engaging in other deflective nonsense just because they don't like the thread topic.

Anyway, was reading about this case here yesterday and thought this summed it up pretty well:

Got a chill down my spine reading that.

This is getting scary. These people are insane.

Grayson

Cilantro2000 wrote: »

I think you're projecting, I haven't seen any evidence in this thread that anyone thinks "women are bad".

The OP never said "some women". They never said "those women" The OP said women. And it wasn't just once.

El_Duderino 09

Grayson wrote: »

homerjay2005 wrote: »

paying somebody a "you look nice today" compliment is seen as harassment by many people now for example.

No it's not. Unless you're talking to their tits.

Seriously. I’d love to actually see the conversation happening in real life. Some people have a weird understanding about what constitutes a compliment.

It happened in work yesterday. A colleague who I don’t really work with but we have lunch at the same time and chat. Used to have long hair half way down her back, came in with shoulder length hair.

Me: new hair Sam?
Sam: yeah got it done at the weekend, still getting used to it.
Me: yeah fair play, it suits you.
Sam: cheers.

Simple.

Outlaw Pete

Grayson wrote: »

To be fair the OP made loads of blanket statements about women and how women have double standards.

No different to the many 'Men think x' or 'Men need to start doing y' statements that were all over the other #metoo thread.

It's clear that their point was that women are bad and don't care if a man is harassed/abused.

Not true at all. You're misrepresenting them. You inferred that as you wanted to.

Either way, why not just attack their views. If they're so preposterous, as you suggest, should be easily done. Saying the thread is really just an excuse for the OP to feel like he's a victim, just comes across as if you have no argument for his opinions and so have chose to try and discredit him instead.

Grayson

Deleted User wrote: »

Apologies. I genuinely got you confused with another poster who was posting in a different thread not too long ago who constantly made blanket statements about men. I realise that it wasn't you.

It's grand. It happens. Thanks for apologising. It's rare to see on the internet

optogirl

Santos Square Extinguisher wrote: »

There's a blatant double standard here. If women expect men to support them when they accuse powerful men of sexual harassment, they should also be willing to support male victims after a powerful woman has been found guilty. But they don't. Instead, they turn on the man and attack him, accusing him of waging a "malicious campaign."

So much for #MeToo.

New York Times story here.

all I've heard and discussed with any of my friends, male and female, identifying as feminists and not, is that this woman's actions are despicable. Just because a few of her friends signed a letter doesn't mean all women think her actions are OK. They are absolutely not.

Feisar

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

And there's the double standard.

I know, it'll take a long long time to change that though.

I think, and it's only my opinion, the thing that needs to change is the notion that the male is the stronger more dominant person in a situation where there is a male and a female present.

PlaneSpeeking

Feisar wrote: »

I know, it'll take a long long time to change that though.

I think, and it's only my opinion, the thing that needs to change is the notion that the male is the stronger more dominant person in a situation where there is a male and a female present.

Whereas it's power - if Meryl Streep wanted to get her a bit of some young one on a film, he might be built like a brick ****house but she has all the power.

Grayson

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

No different to the many 'Men think x' or 'Men need to start doing y' statements that were all over the other #metoo thread.

Not true at all. You're misrepresenting them. You inferred that as you wanted to.

Either way, why not just attack their views. If they're so preposterous, as you suggest, should be easily done. Saying the thread is really just an excuse for the OP to feel like he's a victim, just comes across as if you have no argument for his opinions and so have chose to discredit him instead.

I suggest you go back to where I said that what happened was horrible. To clarify, It seems like the woman who committed those acts was a horrible person and I can't understand why people would defend her. Is that clear enough?

El_Duderino 09

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Feisar wrote: »

I don't think female harassment has the same severity attached to it.

And there's the double standard.

Agreed. There was a thread about Male sexual harassment and lots of men gave examples of being groped and fondled by women in hen groups and similar. They didn’t take it seriously at all and discouraged others from taking it seriously.

If men won’t take it seriously then it’s obviously going to be more difficult to get the general population to take it seriously.

Women have campaigned hard over years to have female sexual harassment taken seriously. It didn’t just happen by itself.

PlaneSpeeking

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Agreed. There was a thread about Male sexual harassment and lots of men gave examples of being groped and fondled by women in hen groups and similar. They didn’t take it seriously at all and discouraged others from taking it seriously.

If men won’t take it seriously then it’s obviously going to be more difficult to get the general population to take it seriously.

Women have campaigned hard over years to have female sexual harassment taken seriously. It didn’t just happen by itself.

It's terrifying seeing a hen party in a bar - if that behaviour was reversed they'd demand the men be fired from their jobs, shamed and ruined.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Women have campaigned hard over years to have female sexual harassment taken seriously.

I didn't realize that women campaigned to have female sexual harassment taken seriously. I thought the position was that all sexual harassment should be condemned. Apparently not.

Cleopatra_

Keepaneye wrote: »

Can we also have a metoo mega thread? Since all your man hating needs an outlet.

Well, I don't hate men or start threads about how terrible men are so your post doesn't make sense.