In the last month, the Daily has been flooded with commentary on the sexual harassment charges pressed by Iris Halpern against The Primary Source. The more I follow the case, the more I am left with a bilious taste in my mouth.
The case began with an issue of The Primary Source that had published several comments as well as a cartoon referencing SLAM's vocal political leader - cutting down the value of her cause and the worth of her statements to the size of her breasts. What followed were a series of insidious steps made to silence her voice and her cause which culminated in the dismissal of her charges and the invalidation of her claims that she had been sexually harassed.
And yet, there is no doubt there are many on campus who would argue my point. How could I claim that Ms. Halpern has been silenced when her situation has garnered so much press coverage and discussion? This case cannot exist in a vacuum. It is part of a much larger system of oppression, the insidious silencing of the female voice in situations of sexual violation.
Who, you may ask, is the silent one? Though Ms. Halpern has been extremely active and vocal about her determination to bring her case to the fore, has anyone been able to see past the cartoon of the headless, large-breasted woman published in the Source?
Examination of the events of the trial lead us to an answer. Ms. Halpern pressed charges on the grounds of sexual harassment; the CSL gave a verdict whose theme was free speech. In her opening statement, Ms. Halpern discussed the violation of the University's nondiscrimination and sexual harassment policy, which grants all students the right to be free of discrimination and degradation based gender and anatomy.
Ms. Halpern made explicit in her statement that she was aware of the implications of the charges and that her argument was separate from and not challenging the University's commitment to uphold freedom of speech for its publications. "This is not an issue about free speech, for I have no wish to shut down The Primary Source or censor its political views. I do not want to prohibit The Primary Source from being able to publish their opposing political and social views in the future...[but it] should have to account for its sexist actions in their targeting of me as a woman in this private institution that does not wish to perpetuate a hostile environment against women..." (taken from section 4 of Ms. Halpern's opening statement).
The case was given no more than an hour of questions, whereupon Ms. Halpern had to raise questions on the theme of sexual harassment to supplement the CSL's few and thematically irrelevant questions. Following the trial was a mere 25 minutes of discussion before the CSL came to its conclusion. The body's statements, as recalled by Ms. Halpern, were as follows: "...we the panel of unanimously decided to drop the charges against The Primary Source. This in no way indicates we endorse The Primary Source, but the University is dedicated to freedom of expression." Notice here their failure to even mention sexual harassment - revealing that her accusation was unheard and the issues that she had raised left un-addressed.
Under the guise of free speech, a university-funded publication was acquitted of clear and direct sexual harassment. Throughout the process, in printed commentary, public commentary, and private discussion I have witnessed, people have thumbed their noses at Ms. Halpern's vocal fight against sexual harassment.
This is an exact demonstration of the insidious power of the words and images printed in The Primary Source as well as those that fill popular culture and media. If a woman activist happens to wear an "oh-so-tight-tank top...Yum" (Primary Source, 10/11) or a rape victim a pair of jeans, is she to be blamed as the source of her own sexual harassment and violation? This is not an issue of clothing, it is an issue of respect, of visibility, and of overcoming a system of oppression that is founded upon a silencing of the active and activist female voice.
It is absolutely contemptible the way Ms. Halpern's case was handled and concluded. The devaluing of the strength of women's words and the right of their bodies to pass judged by the worth of their minds, ideas, and actions by a social and judicial system that ignores their call for justice must be stopped and these voices must be allowed to be heard.
Andi Sutton is a senior majoring in women's studies and participating in the joint degree program with the School at the Museum of Fine Art.
