Crying Wolf

It was about ten years ago that I went through "sexual harassment training" for the first time.

The basic rule: If someone thought they were being harassed, they were being harassed.

Which is one thing. The corollary, of course, was that if someone thought that you were harassing them, you were basically guilty until proven innocent.

Sexual harassment - the real kind, where peoples' careers and safety are jeopardized - is a problem, and very, very wrong to boot. Nobody's excusing that (and I resent the fact that I have to disclaim that, against the inevitable "Berg supports harassment!" comment).

Debra J. Saunders' piece in today's Strib notes the non-shocking observation that it's worse on campus:

a new study by the American Association of University Women found that "nearly two-thirds of college students experience sexual harassment at some point during college." When you consider what the AAUW's definition of sexual harassment is -- "unwanted or unwelcome sexual behavior that interferes with your life" -- it is surprising that the percentage is so low. The study even lists "sexual comments, jokes, gestures or looks" as "examples of different types of sexual harassment."

As the Philadelphia-based group FIRE -- Foundation for Individual Rights in Education -- noted in a press release, the AAUW's definition risks "trivializing actual harassment." Samantha Harris of FIRE noted, "If I were someone who experienced real harassment, I wouldn't want to be lumped in with people who heard a bad joke."

I worried ten years ago that trivialization was the least of the problems; abuse was a bigger worry:

FIRE is afraid that universities will use ratcheted-up sexual harassment rules to stifle free speech. Ditto O'Connor, who noted, "It would take all the fun out of life, if you couldn't have conversations."

Harris noted, "Harassment policies are frequently used to suppress any speech that someone might find offensive." William Paterson University of New Jersey reprimanded a graduate student and employee who sent an e-mail to a professor in which he objected to a movie about two aging lesbians -- he called them "perversions" -- after the professor complained that she felt threatened by the e-mail. In December, after FIRE got involved, the school revoked the reprimand -- but the reprimand never should have happened.

Laws and rules like these follow free-market rules in that when you make an opening, people will flock to fill it:

The AAUW study even listed someone calling you "gay or lesbian" to be sexual harassment, if the words are unwanted. This should scare you: 57 percent of students polled want their college to set up an Internet site where they can make anonymous accusations of sexual harassment. This reinforces the strong sense I get that the AAUW doesn't think students have an obligation to fend for themselves.

But perhaps the scariest part of the piece?

Years ago, Saturday Night did a sketch about a politically correct game show. The show starred one of the nameless comedic red-shirts that were on the show at the time (this was the season before the Will Farrell/Cheri Oteri/Molly Shannon era started) and guest-host Shannon Doherty (remember her?).

Doherty's character, dressed in lefty-school poverty chic, was introduced as a "Victimology studies" major.

"Ha ha ha", I thought. "Victimology studies. What a capable satire of the overweening institutionalized panic of the chattering classes in academia! Wotta bunch of jokers!"

Saunders:

One sophomore noted, "There's a guy in all my classes who consistently touches me in a sexual way that I really don't appreciate." What is her major? Victimhood.

Campus political correctness; where satire is reality.

UPDATE: While I can't make it up fast enough, I apparently also have altered perceptions at 6AM. Saunders' "Victimhood" crack was apparently satiric.

Well, for now.

Posted by Mitch at February 3, 2006 06:44 AM | TrackBack