NEWS
campusreview.com.au
#NotMe
Feminists and colleagues
defend academic accused
of sexual harassment.
By Loren Smith
A
vital Ronell, a 66-year-old New
York University academic, is being
investigated in relation to a sexual
harassment complaint made against her by
a male PhD student. And there is outrage.
But hold the confirmation bias: the outrage
is against the accuser, and, in turn, against
Ronell’s supporters.
Ronell, a professor of German and
comparative literature who has taught
with Jacques Derrida, Slavoj Žižek and
Judith Butler, was defended in a letter to
NYU’s president and provost, allegedly
affirmed by 51 academics from a plethora
of institutions.
“We write as long-term colleagues of
Professor Avital Ronell, who has been under
investigation by the Title IX offices at New
York University,” the letter begins.
“Although we have no access to the
confidential dossier, we have all worked for
many years in close proximity to Professor
Ronell and accumulated collectively
years of experience to support our view
of her capacity as teacher and a scholar,
but also as someone who has served as
chair of both the departments of German
and comparative literature at New York
University.
“We have all seen her relationship
with students, and some of us know the
individual who has waged this malicious
campaign against her.
“We wish to communicate first in the
clearest terms our profound and enduring
admiration for Professor Ronell, whose
mentorship of students has been no less
than remarkable over many years.
“We deplore the damage that this
legal proceeding causes her, and seek to
register in clear terms our objection to any
judgment against her.
“We hold 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.”
The letter, which goes on to refer to
Ronell’s “grace”, “wit” and “brilliance”, was
allegedly drafted by Butler – a renowned
feminist scholar who currently holds a
professorship at the University of California,
Berkeley.
Butler has said the version of the letter
circulating online is incorrect, particularly in
regard to the list of signatories.
Meanwhile, Žižek, a Slovenian public
philosopher, in addition to allegedly signing
the letter, wrote his own defence of Ronell,
published in The Philosophical Salon.
“Reactions to the letter focused on the
question: How can we, the signatories,
support her when we concede that we
don’t know the details of the accusation
against her?” he wrote.
“So why did I sign the letter? For a very
simple reason: I DO know the details of the
accusations against her, and I find them
utterly ridiculous.
“What makes me really sad is that the
procedure against Avital is effectively
targeting a certain psychological type, a
certain mode of behaviour and speech for
which there is less and less place in our
academia. Sometimes this type is mercifully
tolerated as an eccentricity, but it always
stands in the shadow of threat.”
Yet several other academics have
expressed outrage over the letter, claiming
the same support wouldn’t be afforded to a
male scholar in Ronell’s position.
“Imagine that such a letter had been sent
on behalf of Peter Ludlow, Colin McGinn,
John Searle, Thomas Pogge or anyone
other than a f eminist literary theorist: there
would be howls of protest and indignation
at such a public assault on a complainant
in a Title IX case,” Brian Leiter, director of
the Center for Law, Philosophy, and Human
Values at the University of Chicago wrote
on his blog.
Leiter, who linked to a copy of the
(in Butler’s view, false) letter in the
blog post, also included links to other
academics’ dismay at the letter of
support for Ronell.
NYU has declined to comment on the
matter, even to clarify whether it falls
under Title IX. It has simply stated that it is
under review.
Passed in 1972, Title IX is a federal civil
rights law that prohibits discrimination on
the basis of sex in educational institutions
that receive federal funding.
It was initially used to ensure women
could participate equally in sports; however,
more recently it has been applied to sexual
assault and harassment cases.
The law gained much media attention
in 2011, when then-president Barack
Obama issued a letter to American
universities outlining how they should
change the burden of proof in such cases
from ‘clear and convincing evidence’
(75 per cent) to ‘a preponderance of
evidence’ (just over 50 per cent).
Known as the ‘Dear Colleague’ letter,
its edicts are increasingly under fire for
supposedly being used without due process
in relation to university sexual harassment
and assault cases, and resultantly,
prejudicing those who are accused of these
deeds. Indeed, last year, US education
secretary Betsy DeVos implemented interim
measures, rolling back Obama’s policy in
this respect. ■
3