More Than A Personal Problem

Overseers, trustees, administrators and students have talked about sexual harassment for more than a year. Yet the only comment President Bok could make ten days ago was that "it is not nice the first time it happens--to be called in and talked to by the dean and some sort of penalty administered and so forth" This is reminiscent of Assistant Dean of the College Marlyn M. Lewis '70's earlier comment that punishment is a "family matter" between the professor and the dean because, "We try to give instructors the privacy to recover." One wonders if the Harvard administration has any idea of the suffering a victim undergoes. It's not nice to the harassed, either.

The victim of sexual harassment has very few options. The primary goal is survival. One is advised to drop the course, change sections, or try to weather the storm, if one seeks any advice at all Many people are willing to advise the victim: senior tutors, the Bureau of Study Counsel. University Health Service, Room 13 and Lewis among them, but such advice may only ease the victim's discomfort.

It rarely leads to an elimination of the problem, to prevention of escalation of the harassment, of to any sort of mitigation of possible retaliation by the harasser. Many victims speak of skipping classes, avoiding office hours, or enduring a semester of abusive comments because of no alternatives.

The effects are often long-range, Victims feel their trust in academic relationships is destroyed; they often suffer from writer's block and other academic troubles which impair their course work. Since the harassment in based on sexual identity, victims also suffer in their peer relationships. Changing sections when possible may alleviate the immediate problems, but it does not address the true issue.

Sexual harassment is the above of one's authority as an instructor to emphasize the sexuality of the student. The unwitting student thus becomes a sexual being with no individual identity beyond her his gender. Sexual harassment is more than a personal issue between the harasser and victim; it becomes sex discrimination on the broadest scale. When a man harasses one woman, he is threatening all women.

Fortunately, the University does admit that sexual harassment exists. After all, Dean Rosovsky has said, "I know it when I see it," and since he is the only one with the power to reprimand, that may be the only definition necessary. Unfortunately, this definition does nothing to educate the community.

There is no way for a woman to fight harassment unless she realizes that the sexual pressure she feels is simply inappropriate in an academic setting. The lack of a definition allows professors to claim they have done no wrong. It also allows the administration to blame the victim, telling her that she must have somehow encouraged the harasser's behavior. Without a set definition, there is no clear way to decide whether a particular case has merit and should be investigated.

In the last case judged to have merit, the student was not initially informed what actions were taken agains the harasser. At that time, the professor's reaction to being accused was seen as more important than the victim's right to know the outcome of her case. Although there have been no formal procedural changes, administrators now agree to inform the victim of any actions taken.

It would he unfortunate if every problem with the current grievance procedure was solved only through trial and error. The current procedure lacks several basic elements. There is no appeals process. There is no timetable given for investigation and resolution of the matter (thus the University could stall beyond 180 days, the limit set by the Office of Civil Rights for the filing of a sexual harassment complaint). There is no clause regarding the rights of both the harassed and the accused to solicit support from friends or advisors throughout the process. Finally, there is no provision regarding the resolution of cases in which a grade is challenged.

Yesterday's precedent-setting case in which the Ad Board changed the status of a harassment victim's grade from a letter grade to "Pass" is not a formal procedural change. The problem will arise again. No student should be required to have the same case judged by two distinct bodies.

The fact that Harvard has not changed the procedure for evaluating the work of a sexual harassment victim shows its lack of understanding of a basic issue. An instructor who treat's a student as a sexual object cannot judge that student's work impartially. In addition, the harassed student is working in a hostile environment, and the work produced will reflect the added strain. One wonders how many make-up exams are taken because strain in the classroom prevented the student from completing the required work on time.

Fortunately, some administrators have realized the seriousness of this issue. Although a policy statement has not been drafted, there are deans in University Hall who support such an action. Last term, the Committee on Houses and Undergraduate Life recommended that the Faculty "recognize the problem of sexual harassment" and "review and publicize the procedures for dealing with it." The issue is now on the Faculty Council docket and will be discussed this fall.

One hopes that the Faculty Council will review all facts of the issue Sexual harassment indicates a lack of respect for women. It damages the general quality of education and harms the integrity of this institution. Sexual harassment has been seen as a problem between two individuals. If it is dealt with only on this most personal of levels, the broader issues will never be addressed.

Victoria L. Eastus '83, is one of the three authors of the Radcliffe Union of Students pamphlet on sexual harassment.