First, this article is both cogent and stylistically beautiful. A joy to read.
To add to the maelstrom of questions about power and justice, although the authors of the defense are now refining and correcting their comments, I’m not sure if their defense was a ‘mistake.’ In some ways, it is logical extension of one strain of critical theory. We have long argued that racism cannot exist without power, that the oppressed class is ‘punching up,’ thus Sarah Jeong’s comments are substantively different from Quinn Norton’s. We have also decided that sexism cannot exist without power. Women can #killallmen and professors can openly pontificate as to whether women are right to hate all men, and it will be defended by the core of media and academia.
It is not such a far step to suggest that harassment or sexual assault cannot exist without power. In this case, arguing that Mr. Reitman’s status as a young man trumps her and actually makes Ms. Ronnell the victim regardless of her conduct and before evidence comes into play, despite her institutional power as his adviser. Slavoj Zizek comes perilously close to unraveling a key defense in feminism here, arguing that Mr. Reitman is weaponizing his victim status. Virtually every feminist I know would kill such a charge in the cradle were it aimed differently simply to prevent the precedent.
There has never been a point in history where it is more important to evaluate hierarchy, power, bias, and your piece does beautiful work in that discussion.
- As women begin to take hold of positions of power, we will see more and more instances of its abuse since women are people… even as the systemic trends still point towards men having greater power.
- As computers, algorithms, and formulas make (apparently) even-handed, rule-based decisions without regard to race or sex, we will be challenged to identify how these ‘fair’ applications unfairly affect certain groups.
And yet this case demonstrates how we “hypersocial chimps” may be completely unsuited to the task. How we are likely to moralize first, then rationalize later. To protect the tribe before protecting the truth.
I sincerely appreciate the clear effort and heart you put into writing this. It seriously got me thinking…
