Sexual Harassment: Lesson or Legacy?

In the last two years Harvard's Government Department has been rocked by two publicized sexual harassment cases, both involving respected senior faculty members.

In that time, the department has grappled with ways to rid itself of the harassment problem, which has created a measure of ill will between students and administrators.

In addition, department officials say the number of women graduate students accepting offers of admission to the department has declined significantly in the last two years at least in part because of the two harassment cases.

The department is also seeing a vigorous student protest against the return this fall of one of the professors accused of sexual harassment, Jorge I. Dominguez, Harvard's senior authority on Latin American political science.

Dominguez was disciplined in the summer of 1983 for sexually harassing a female junior faculty member in the department and last year took an unexpected leave of absence. In February of this year, Harvard announced that Professor of Government Douglas A. Hibbs Jr. would resign as a result of an allegation of sexual misconduct. The two cases follow a 1979 case in which another tenured faculty member in the department was reprimanded for sexually harassing a member of the Class of '83, according to reports at the time.

Three of the four publicized cases of harassment at Harvard within the last six years have involved tenured professors of government; the fourth case implicated a visiting scholar who was teaching a writing course.

The publicity has focused campuswide attention on the Government Department, even though recent surveys have shown the problem exists throughout the University and the nation.

The cases of the three government professors have apparently not tarnished Harvard's reputation among academics across the country, and many applaud the University for its professional handling of sexual harassment.

But some students are still concerned that the department has not done enough to erase the legacy of the past six years.

Dominguez's return has raised a flurry of controversy centering on the freedom of professors to choose what courses they will teach and, conversely, the freedom of students to avoid professors implicated for sexual harassment.

In reponse to the three publicized sexual harassment cases, the Government Department has set up a sexual harassment committee to address the various issues and gnated several professors to serve as counselors and supply informal assistance to individuals who believe they have been victimized.

In addition, Government Department Chairman Robert D. Putnam sends all incoming graduate students a statement outlining the procedures for filing a sexual harassment complaint and the resources available to those not ready to pursue official action. The statement says, and Putnam reiterates, that "sexual harassment and other forms of abuse or professional authority are firmly condemned by the Government Department, as by the University community as a whole."

The sexual harassment complaints and the legal restrictions regarding their confidentiality have left Putnam in a difficult position as department chairman. He is legally bound not to discuss individual cases and must at the same time fend off student criticisms.

All investigation and sanction regarding sexual harassment cases rests in the hands of the dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences.

Student Protest

The graduate student protest centers on the selection of Dominguez to co-teach one graduate-level course with department Chairman Putnam.

The course, Government 2105, "Field Seminar in Comparative Politics," is the only such offering designed to prepare students to take their general exams in the popular field. Students say that makes the course "de facto required."

In other words, 15 or so students each year, they argue, will have no choice but to associate with a professor charged with sexual harassment.

The course instructors vary from year to year and are not named ahead of time. This means that students do not know who will teaching the course in any given year.

The issue, more specifically, is that of "disassociation." Certain graduate students argue that, for five years after a finding of sexual misconduct by a faculty member, they should not have to take courses from such instructors nor face them on an exam board.

The disassociation proposal, which the eight-student Government Department Sexual Harassment Committee drafted shortly after Dominguez' discipline came to light, appears to have gained momentum since his return to Harvard. The committee was convened in the wake of the Dominguez incident.

In an attempt to extend the protest to undergraduates, Elaine K. Swift, a sixth-year graduate student and member of the department's sexual harassment committee, distributed a three-page photocopied history of the Dominguez case to about 70 students attending an early lecture of one of his courses, Foreign Cultures 18, "Comparative Politics of Latin America."

Students interviewed after the lecture say the leaflet would not affect their decision to take the course, though many say they had not been aware of the sexual harassment case.

During the last two weeks, the Graduate Student Council, Women in Science, and the Radcliffe Union of Students have all formally endorsed a proposal upholding a student's right to disassociation on the grounds of moral objection to sexual harassment. The University defines such misconduct as "unwanted sexual behavior such as physical contact or verbal comments or suggestions, which adversely affects the working or learning environment of an individual."

Don't Second-Guess

The Government Department for two years has steadfastly rejected the disassociation proposal. "The department can't be in a position of trying to second-guess the University or of running our own separate investigative proceedings. Unless a professor is removed from the classroom, we can't be in the position to say 'you can't teach,"' says department Chairman Putnam.

Yet some graduate students charge that the department has, in fact, bent over backwards not only to disregard their request that Dominguez not teach the effectively required course, but also to shed a favorable light on the professor.

One graduate student, sexual harassment committee member Claire Laporte, charges that the department's decision to pair department chairman Putnam with Dominguez in teaching Gov 2105 represents a calculated decision "to legitimate Dominguez's presence, to say, 'Here, he's rehabilitated."'

Putnam vehemently denies the charges, saying, "The department is not in the business of giving or taking legitimacy from anyone. The assignment of courses to professors is done purely on the basis of the expertise of instructors, particularly in the case of field seminars."

Laporte counters that professors in the past have been discouraged from teaching certain courses for reasons other than their expertise. For example, she says, poor lecturers are often encouraged not to teach introductory courses.

Putnam says the department's three other comparative politics specialists would not have been able to accommodate Gov 2105 into their academic schedules this term.

Dominguez refuses to comment on his case or on issues surrounding sexual harassment.

Sexual harassment committee members Laporte and Swift also criticize the Government Department for not doing enough to protect sexual harassment victims and government graduate students in general from the fallout of such incidents.

They say, for example, that the department has perennially rejected graduate student requests to appoint new or visiting faculty members to provide a "meaningful alternative" to professors implicated for sexual harassment.

As a result, graduate students say, at least five graduate students who came to study with Dominguez have since arranged to study with Dominguez have since arranged to study elsewhere to avoid further contact with the professor. Putnam has not been able to produce any specific statistics, but has confirmed that the number of graduate students in Latin American politics has dropped since 1983. It is unclear how many graduate students now study Latin American politics.

"All of us felt that the University had not taken sufficient action either to protect the victims of sexual harassment or to insure a viable work environment for students of Latin American politics who wished to continue in the field at Harvard," says Jeffrey W. Rubin, a sixth-year student in Latin American politics. "Most of those who left did so for this reason."

Sylvia Maxfield, a fifth-year graduate student, was once a student of Dominguez. She says she filed a sexual misconduct complaint against him, charging that he had both sexually harassed her and tried to pit her against the junior professor whose sexual harassment complaint resulted in Dominguez's discipline. Harvard as a matter of policy does not discuss specific cases or their settlements (Harvard's announcement of the Hibbs resignation was an extraordinary exception).

The University, Maxfield says, assured her that "Dominguez would never have anything to do with me again" and that she could still get her Ph.D. without any contact with the professor. Although Maxfield remains technically enrolled at Harvard, she is writing her dissertation at the University of San Diego.

The Government Department this term has only one specialist, Dominguez, in Latin American politics. From an academic perspective, the lack of another specialist in that field is not necessarily a problem for the department. The question is whether the department should search for another specialist because students find the first professor objectionable on ethical grounds.

"In principle it opens up a logistical nightmare for the University," Assistant Professor of Government Lisa Anderson says of the conflict between academics and ethics. "Harassment is not limited to sex--other forms can be equally serious. On what grounds do you have to have two faculties?"'

While some graduate students appear ready to continue pushing for the right to disassociation, others say they believe it is not constructive to dwell on past cases.

"Since the fact is that Jorge Dominguez is a member of this university, we must all try to make the best of it. What he did was wrong and very destructive, but we must now give him the benefit of the doubt that he will not abuse his position again," says one female government graduate student who asked not to be identified.

"We really don't have the right to play judge and jury and make a pariah out of someone who has by the University's procedures paid his dues," says Radcliffe Union of Students (RUS) President Ann Pellegrini '86. Pellegrini says she opposed Swift's decision to distribute the leaflet about Dominguez.

While RUS supports the right to disassociation, Pellegrini says she does not believe that putting particular professors in the public spotlight is the best way to free students from having to associate with certain professors.

Reputation Intact

Though the Hibbs and Dominguez cases received nationwide attention, the incidents seem to have had less impact on the department's reputation outside Harvard than it has had within the walls of Littauer Center.

Most academics contacted at other colleges agree that sexual harassment by certain individuals has not reduced their respect for the quality of the Government Department.

"One always has to make a distinction between the intellectual characteristics and the morals," says Joseph Cropsey, the University of Chicago's director of graduate studies in political science. "The whole profession deplored and was shocked by what happened at Harvard, but it hasn't translated itself into the opinion that the department has deteriorated."

"When we think of Harvard, we think of the place where we lost some of our best applicants," Cropsey adds.

Other professors agree. "If I were to ask most of my colleagues in the corridors [about Harvard], they would consider who's there in certain fields. About one in 15 would probably mention the sexual harassment," says R. Bruce Douglas, chairman of Georgetown's government department.

All the scholars interviewed say they know of no one who has been dissuaded from coming to Harvard for fear of sexual harassment. Putnam says he, too, heard no such reasons when he asked potential female graduate students why they gave Harvard the thumbs-down.

"I think people feel it's unfortunate and feel sorry for the people involved, but people don't make judgments," says Allan Kornberg, chairman of Duke's political science department. "If I had an undergraduate who wanted to come to Harvard, I'd say, 'Great, it's a great place."'

But apparently not all academics agree. In February 1984, 12 members of the Latin American Studies Association, a national professional association of university teachers, journalists and lawyers, wrote a letter to President Derek C. Bok and then-Dean of the Faculty Henry Rosovsky. In that letter, the professors said that because Bok had made no public statement about the Dominguez case, they did not feel they could recommend students to Harvard's graduate program.

Rosovsky, in a letter dated March 19, 1984 and obtained by The Crimson, responded: "If I thought that a further public statement would serve a clearly constructive purpose, I believe I am sufficiently aware of my responsibilities [as dean] to have issued one."

The letter continues: "Under the circumstances, your letter displays a degree of moral arrogance that is unusual even by the unfortunate standards prevailing in the academic profession ... One further thought: rather than spending your time lecturing other institutions, why not dedicate yourself with equal fervor to the avoidance of those very problems at your universities?" Rosovsky could not be reached for comment yesterday.

Academics agree that sexual harassment is not a problem restricted to Harvard, nor certainly to academia. They reiterate that Harvard has dealt with the problem in a more public manner than most other institutions, giving the appearance that the problem is worse than at other schools.

Many say Harvard's public handling of its sexual harassment cases has heightened awareness of the problem at other universities. "Harvard is substantially more visible with regard to these issues because they've been more publicized. We've never discussed Harvard as a hotbed of sexual discrimination--people are aware it's a problem, but it's nothing unique to Harvard," says Michael N. Danielson, chairman of Princeton's politics department.

Besides the publicity over the three sexual harassment cases, Harvard in October 1983 released a University-wide survey, just one month after the Dominguez case made headlines, in which one-third of all female students said they had experienced some sort of sexual harassment during their time at Harvard. The study, which some criticized for ambiguity in defining sexual harassment, also indicated that almost none of these women was willing to come forward and have Harvard pursue her case.

A report released this week reveals that two formal complaints of sexual harassment--one in the College and one in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences--were reported last year. The individuals filing formal complaints seek both a formal investigation and University discipline of the alleged offender. The report did not specify which department was involved in each of the incidents.

Harvard Government professors and graduate students interviewed last spring said they think the department's sexual harassment problem stems in part from the lack of women at all levels in the department and the University in general. Of the 40 junior and senior government faculty, four are women. Only one, Cowles Professor of Government Judith N. Shklar, holds a tenured post.

No matter what the root of sexual harassment at Harvard may be, academics agree that the problem is probably more widespread among other colleges than it would appear. Says Princeton's Danielson: "It's probably the tip of the iceberg, and it's hard to deal with icebergs when you can hardly see the tip."CrimsonIan M. RoseDuring the first week of classes, government graduate student Elaine Swift distributed handouts in front of Professor Jorge Dominguez's class describing the background on the Dominguez harassment case.