Last month, the literary world was hit with allegations of sexual misconduct by author and Pulitzer Prize winner, Junot Diaz. The revelations came after novellist , accusing him of forcibly kissing her when she was a 26-year-old grad student.
The fall-out following the accusations was a familiar one in this new #MeToo era: ; he left the festival early and cancelled all other media events in the country; and stepped down from his role as chairman of the Pulitzer Prize Board.
It’s a #MeToo story more complicated than most, with Diaz revealing his own #MeToo experience in an essay for , which detailed his own experience of sexual abuse as a child. Just last week the two editors-in-chief of the Boston Review—a political and literary journal—doubled down on their support of Diaz, who has been the publication’s fiction editor for 15 years.
Deborah Chasman and Joshua Cohen released a stating that while they have been “disturbed by recent reports from women who have come forward to describe the ways they were hurt by him,” they do not feel that it warrants ending their editorial relationship. They argued that while Diaz’s behaviour was “objectionable”, it doesn’t have “the kind of severity that animated the #MeToo movement.”
The fallout from the Boston Review’s decision to retain Diaz’s employment shows the internal struggle that organisations face in this new era of #MeToo
If the bosses at the Boston Review were hoping to simply move on from the controversy, they were mistaken. Following the statement’s release, three of the publication’s editors announced their resignation. Poetry editors, B.K. Fischer, Stefania Heim and Timothy Donnelly, released a joint statement not only criticising the decision to continue Diaz’s tenure but also Chasman and Cohen’s simplistic understanding of the #MeToo movement.
“What most distresses us are the letter’s apparent arbitration of what constitutes inclusion in the #MeToo movement and its lack of attentiveness to power dynamics in a star-driven media and publishing landscape,” they said. (Chasman responded to that criticism by telling , “We did not intend that to mean we know exactly what #MeToo means.”)
The fallout from the Boston Review’s decision to retain Diaz’s employment shows the internal struggle that organisations face in this new era of #MeToo. No longer is it business as usual, with transgressions dealt with quietly and swiftly so publications can move on as fast as the news cycle. As the #MeToo movement continues to embolden people to speak out against harassment, workplaces have to find better ways to deal with bad behaviour.
It’s not enough to deny or give some non-apology and move on. Bill Clinton’s shock at being questioned about #MeToo and Monica Lewinsky can attest to this. Last week, about whether he would have looked at his affair differently through this new lens of #MeToo, and in light of the fact that Lewinsky has described the affair .
Instead of taking this as an opportunity to come to terms with his behaviour, Clinton’s response was defensive. “No, I felt terrible then, and I came to grips with it...Nobody believes that I got out of that for free,” he said, arguing that the media was ignoring the facts.
“This was litigated 20 years ago, two-thirds of the American people sided with me. They were not insensitive to that. I had a sexual harassment policy when I was governor in the eighties. I had two women chiefs of staff when I was governor. Women were overrepresented in the attorney’s general office in the ‘70s. I’ve had nothing but women leaders in my office since I left. You’re giving one side and omitting facts.”
As this shift continues, and the #MeToo movement continues to gain power, it’s interesting to see is how those in power respond to their own transgressions
Listing off all the ways he believes he has helped women’s representation, Clinton fails to acknowledge that his behaviour was an abuse of power. Or as , Clinton is the most “famous example of a power man sexually misbehaving” at work. The #MeToo movement is bringing the experience of all women to the fore, and those in power are struggling to keep up.
As this shift continues, and the #MeToo movement continues to gain power, it’s interesting to see is how those in power respond to their own transgressions. And it’s heartening to see that some people are getting it.
Just last week, Australian literary journal Meanjin was called out for erasing Aboriginal women’s voices from the #MeToo movement with its latest cover. The magazine’s swift response was refreshing. Editor Jonathan Green apologised for the cover’s “blindness” when most publications wouldn’t be so quick to do so.
Green’s response showed what happens when those in power actually listen. Society can no longer justify tone-deaf or inappropriate behaviour, which is why the Boston Review’s response is so disappointing. It is going to take some pain—and yes, the loss of jobs—for meaningful change to happen. Society is changing, and workplaces need to move along with it.
