Momentum increasing liability for sexual harassment

In remarks made by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, announcing his resignation after an investigation into allegations of sexual harassment, he insisted that he hadn’t intentionally harmed or mistreated women.

“In my mind, I’ve never crossed the line with anyone, but I didn’t realize the extent to which the line has been redrawn,” he said, in a transcript of his remarks provided by The New York Times.

Since the increased visibility and momentum of the #Metoo movement, a social movement started in 2006 to support survivors of sexual violence, this has been a familiar refrain from individuals confronted about their harmful behaviors, saying they were unaware that their words and actions were unwelcome or inappropriate. That position is considered by some to be debatable, at best.

Christopher Uggen is a regents professor and Martindale chair in sociology and law at the University of Minnesota and has been researching sexual harassment for about 20 years. Sharyn Tejani is the director of the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund, part of the National

Women’s Law Center, a women’s rights organization focused on gender justice. (Both the cofounder of the legal defense fund and the president of Time’s Up were mentioned in the New York attorney general’s report on the investigation, as having weighed in on the appropriateness of a letter Cuomo’s office was preparing that would undermine an accuser’s account of harassment, according to The Washington Post.) Uggen and Tejani took some time to discuss sexual harassment, whether the lines of propriety are being redrawn, and what’s necessary to shift the culture away from tolerating these behaviors. (These interviews have been edited for length and clarity. For a longer version of this conversation, visit sandiegouniontribune.com/sdutlisa-deaderick-staff.html.)

Q:

When the governor mentioned not realizing that the lines around appropriate behavior had been redrawn, the allegations about the kinds of behaviors he’d engaged in included unwanted kissing, groping and other inappropriate touching, and remarks about women’s physical appearance and sex lives. Can you talk about how this idea that behaviors that may have been suffered in silence in the past is later seen as people redrawing lines around acceptable and appropriate behavior, and what that does to the ability to stop sexual harassment?

Tejani: The lines are not being redrawn, that is just untrue. If you look at the report, the things that it discusses — touching women, talking about sex, making workers put up with harassment because the alternative is that you will be a less-favored worker, creating an atmosphere where no one complained because they were afraid of retaliation (and then when someone did stand up, she was retaliated against) — all of that has always been on the wrong side of the line. I think that’s really highlighted in the report because the last 30 pages of the report talks about the legal standard, and why the report reached the conclusion that what the governor did violated that standard. It cites cases, from decades ago, that set the standard for what is sexual harassment. So, this idea that this is a new standard, or that somehow the lines have been redrawn, that is completely undercut by what is in the report.

Uggen: I can’t speak to Mr. Cuomo’s state of mind, but it’s true that societies are constantly redrawing the lines between deviant and acceptable behavior — whether the issue is marijuana use, racist speech or sexual harassment. Workplace sexual harassment is as old as the workplace, but it wasn’t publicly named and recognized as a social problem until the 1970s. That said, there have always been “lines” of acceptable and unacceptable workplace behaviors, and some of the allegations against Mr. Cuomo would also have been considered unacceptable in earlier periods, even if they might not have been classified as sexual harassment.

Q:

With the momentum created by the #Metoo movement, in addition to the workshops, seminars and trainings about workplace sexual harassment, do you find it surprising that these examples of harassment against women persist?

Uggen: No. It’s unrealistic to expect a workshop or training session to undo a lifetime of gender socialization and systemic workplace inequalities. There is even some evidence that such trainings can backfire, encouraging pushback or resistance to change. I do see positive change on two fronts, though. First, consciousness of sexual harassment and its harms is on the rise, though I’d caution that this might mean more complaints in coming years, as people who were once silent begin to come forward. Second, more prominent people are being held to account and are facing serious consequences. Although the certainty of punishment remains extremely low today, harassers can no longer count on complete impunity.

Q:

Can you describe the kind of culture that seems to continue and encourage this kind of behavior? And what kinds of shifts in culture need to take place to reverse this behavior and its harm?

Tejani: It has a lot to do with changing how power works by working with your employees to figure out what the problems are in the workplace; helping to have the employees work on the training and figuring out what the discipline should be; making sure that workers aren’t relying on tips, so that they get an actual minimum wage and they don’t have to do exactly what the customer wants, like smiling or removing their mask because the customer is demanding it. It’s changing how power works in the workplace, to give more of the power to workers so they can actually stand up for their rights without fearing what’s going to happen next.

lisa.deaderick@sduniontribune.com