I’m not excusing Charlie Rose or any of the other vile, power abusers who use influence to lure, seduce, harass, and/or attack women at work, on school campuses, or under their care as doctors, teachers or counselors. I only hope it is not naïve to expect that as we change the social construct of gender, we may also find ourselves less at risk of “manly men” who believe harassment is acceptable.
But first – In this day and age, a clear disclaimer is warranted: If you’re easily offended by people who use reasons “why” as a way of excusing bad behavior and then mistake any analysis as excuses for behavior, then you may be tempted to stop reading here. But take note: By giving you reasons “why” I’m in no way making excuses for certain people’s bad behavior. My goal is to give the bad behavior some context so that we can get around to eliminating it.
Here goes: Gender is a social construct.
Whereas “sex” refers to categorization by physical body part, gender is a social construct. Unfortunately, that concept is neither universally accepted, nor particularly helpful to realize. But think about what it has meant over time to people who are age 40 or older. Beginning in toddlerhood, we were bombarded with messaging and social traditions around the idea that boys are supposed to be tough and manly; that they should play with “man” things. They were handed power tools and steered clear of art and dance classes. Whether through TV, movies, teachers and even their own parents, a gender-norm was prescribed on them.
Separate but not equal.
Meanwhile, women and girls gave up the equality fight long ago when we announced that we had “won” the equality battle and gave ourselves a political pat on the back. But it wasn’t a universal sentiment. Either out of naiveté, ignorance or envy, our parents’ generation – even those with daughters – never really believed that we were equal.
Years ago, I had dinner with a large group of friends and family, one of whom was a recently retired male, now in his 80s. With his wife’s assistance, he described a woman sales director his company hired to take over his division at work. His wife egged him on, saying, “Jon, tell them about that ‘broad’ at work!” The two of them either ignored or didn’t notice my disgusted expression as they went on to assert that the woman “obviously” was promoted due to affirmative action. Because this man was close to retirement, he hadn’t worked closely enough with the woman to collect data backing his assertion that she was incompetent.
I can’t pretend I was silent or pleasant during that conversation. But I also didn’t try to affect any sort of attitude change during the meal, nor have I attempted to do so in countless other conversations with people of his generation over the years.
Attitudes like his, which have been pervasive for generations, are not excusable. And as long as people who think like he does have any influence over current and future generations, the effect of those attitudes about women in the workplace will remain.
The bottom line: Power imbalance and unearned power cause sexual harassment and abuse. I’d like to think men with antiquated ways of thinking are a dying breed. I’d like to think that a collective society that’s already filled with strong women role models – and that now includes more stay-at-home husbands and fathers – will be increasingly less at risk of sexual assault and harassment over time. If time forces the attrition of men who were raised to be misogynists, the power imbalance will vanish. With no power imbalance, it will be easier for both men and women to say “no” to harassment and abuse without fear of reprisal.
At least, that’s what I’d like to think.
