Sex + Relationships

On Change And Accountability

By Clarisse Thorn

December 23, 2011

Do we actually believe that people can change? If so, how do we want them to show us they’ve changed? Is absolution possible? Who decides the answers to these questions?

I very rarely weigh in on Internet Scandals. This is partly because I’ve got lots of stuff to write that I believe has longer-lasting value than the latest flavor of the moment. It’s also because I have much less time and patience for internet flamewars than I once did. I seem to recall that at some point flamewars were kind of … fun? But these days they just feel predictable, tiring, and unproductive.

As it happens, though, I unintentionally found myself in the middle of one this week. I feel exhausted and trapped by the whole thing. But I hope I can dim the flamewar into a lantern to illuminate issues that actually matter.

Specifically, I interviewed Hugo Schwyzer, a prominent writer on gender issues, who identifies as a male feminist and teaches gender studies in southern California. Hugo has a very complicated history that includes incredibly problematic behavior: drug addiction; compulsive and destructive sexual behavior, including sex with his students—and one attempt, over a decade ago, to kill both himself and his girlfriend during a drug binge. He has since, in his own words, “cleaned up;” chosen sobriety; recommitted to his religion; confessed his history; and attempted to make amends to the people he feels that he wronged.

Because of Hugo’s history, a lot of people really don’t like him. When I posted the interview at Feministe, one of the top feminist blogs, the comments exploded. Pretty soon, the comments had nothing to do with the interview at all. Some commenters were making amateur psychological diagnoses of Hugo, and other readers were emailing me privately to express shock at how ugly the discussion had gotten. So I closed down the discussion, making it impossible to continue commenting in that particular forum. As a result, I have now received more hate mail from other feminists than I ever have from anti-feminists. (Note: I have not received a small amount of hate mail from anti-feminists.)

In this situation, people seem to expect me to take a position that is primarily political. People seem to believe that I can either “prove my loyalty to feminism” by throwing Hugo under the bus—or I can “prove my loyalty to Hugo” by claiming that everything he’s done is A-OK. Like many political problems, neither of these options are fully human. Both of these options are stupid, limited, and do not get us any further in our lives.

I certainly do not always agree with Hugo, and I have occasionally pushed him to reconsider certain things. But, full disclosure: My experiences with him have been incredibly positive. Hugo was one of the first high-profile bloggers to promote my work—and occasionally, he took heat for doing so when I wrote about controversial topics. Hugo invited me to guest lecture in his class when I passed through Los Angeles, and he’s given me extensive feedback on and encouragement about my work. Even though I don’t always agree with him, and I believe that a lot of feminists’ critiques of his work are valid … a number of Hugo’s pieces make me want to cheer, like his article “The Paris Paradox: How Sexualization Replaces Opportunity with Obligation.” Perhaps ironically, when I once wrote an agonized post about moral accountability and how to deal with friends who have done really bad things, the most thoughtful and nuanced response came from Hugo. (He’s also written about the problem of how too many people will excuse some sexual predators, even within feminism itself, just because those predators do good activist work.)

Other feminists have been angrily emailing me, Tweeting at me, etc., with things like “FUCK YOU FOR PROTECTING THIS WOLF IN SHEEP’S CLOTHING.” But I have seen no evidence that Hugo hasn’t made an honest and sustained effort at recovery and accountability. I have seen no evidence that Hugo’s religious re-conversion was dishonest. And I have seen no evidence that Hugo continues problematic behavior.

I am telling you this partly to explain where I’ve been coming from during this particular Internet Scandal. But more importantly, I’m telling you this to lend shape to the ethical problems I see underneath it—problems that are intimately intertwined with how I think about gender and sexuality. I’m actually not very interested in picking apart Hugo himself, whether positively or negatively. I believe that the politics of this situation are mostly a cheap distraction from truth and honor.

For me, the interesting and important questions that emerge in cases like this are:

How can we create processes for accountability? Feminists often discuss crimes like partner violence and sexual assault. Our focus is on helping survivors of these crimes, just as it should be. I personally have been trained as a rape crisis counselor, and I have volunteered in that capacity (if you’re interested in feminist activism, then I really encourage you to look into doing the same). And the history of feminism includes convincing people to actually care about and recognize the trauma of rape: Rape Trauma Syndrome was first defined and discussed in the 1970s.

But perhaps because of our focus on helping and protecting survivors, I rarely see feminist discussions of how to deal with people who have committed crimes. In fact, I rarely see any discussions of how to deal with that, aside from sending people to jail. Let me just say that problems with the prison-industrial complex are their own thing—but even aside from those, the vast majority of rapes and assaults and other forms of gender-based violence go unprosecuted.

So, frequently, jail won’t even enter the picture. Yet communities and individuals often know that gender-based violence is going on. How do we talk about the people who have done those things, and how do we talk to them? How can we create community structures and norms that enable people to change the behaviors that led to those crimes? How do we interact with and judge someone who has committed to change, as opposed to a person who has not?

“Accountability teams” are one way I’ve heard of for dealing with this: whether support groups of perpetrators who share their experiences with making amends and changing their ways, or groups of friends who assist a perpetrator with those processes. I would like to see more and larger discussions about those teams, and more acknowledgement that change is possible. If we can’t create this kind of process, then how can we expect to create real change around these crimes? How can we expect perpetrators of violence to work on themselves if we can’t give them the space to work? Why should someone work for forgiveness if they know forgiveness can never come?

On another note: Are there crimes where we draw a bright line? Are there things we cannot or should not forgive? If some crimes are unforgivable, then how do we deal with the perpetrators? In some areas of the United States, sex crimes are punished legally by restricting the movement of perpetrators, but this law has had significant unintended consequences. And the legal question doesn’t even cover the dimension I’m most interested in, which is how friends and social circles can deal with these situations. If there are unforgivable crimes, then how do we handle the unforgiven people involved?

And: Have you thought about these questions in your own life? I don’t mean abstractly, as an intellectual exercise. Concretely, and with intention. What would you do if, tomorrow, you found out that your best friend was a rapist? Your lover? What would you do if your sibling came to you to confess a terrible crime? To request absolution? To request accountability?

These questions are not just applicable to an individual like Hugo. They’re applicable to all of us, in all kinds of situations. And I think it’s wise for us to give them some thought before they come up … because in the heat of the moment, we can be overwhelmed by questions we could have thought our way around if we addressed them beforehand.

Do you believe people can change? And if you do believe it, then how would you help someone change?

Note from early 2012: This piece kicked up a huge controversy, and I learned a lot from the ensuing debate. If I were writing this piece today, then I would not write it the way I did above. My favorite response to this piece around the internet was posted by Maia at Alas, A Blog. It’s really good and I later requested that we be permitted to cross-post it to Feministe, a request that Maia gracefully granted.

Another update: In late January 2012, I posted about some stuff I’ve been reading on transformative justice.

« Back

Font Size:

socal-sj
12/27/11 at 05:09 PM #
Delurking not to weigh in on the controversy (I think legitimate points are being made on both sides, but there’s also dispiriting fail and flame) — but just to let you know, because I know you’ve been going through a rough patch with the accident and this Internet flameup, that I’ve always enjoyed your writing and hope you never stop doing what you do. You’re one of the very worthwhile voices of sex-positive feminism in my book. Happy New Year.
robin plan
12/26/11 at 12:12 PM #
Kudos Clarisse from 1 feminist who has had to grapple lifelong with the questions you pose here. I come from violence, including rape and murder in a family in which all members (but me) have done hard time. These questions are for me, inescapable, in part because there are new generations being born into it, and as an adult I might have some influence with the kids that I didn’t have myself in a crimogenic environment of violent adults who ruled my world.

I am a survivor and feminist who has counseled rapist and incest perpetrators, done some internships with prisoners too, and like you I wish to see more feminists take up that cross. I find it hard to take bossy feminists seriously until they have been in the trenches, and it’s understandable they don’t want to go there, since dealing with the lives of people interferes with ideology, and some think that’s a bad thing.

I’m afraid your questions, which are normal, everyday human inquiries, are not going to be answered to your satisfaction by dogmatists, because they cancel out dogmatism. But I want to say hooray for your strong stance, especially the part about keeping your own mental well-being primary when under attack.
Geo
12/25/11 at 11:59 PM #
Why don’t we Men – struggle more with each other – working with Male Allies, working against Male Violence, working to support Male (and Female) Victims/Survivors.

Instead – oft times we try to cozy up to Women and try to criticize both Feminist Women and other Men – at a distance. See: www.AMensProject.com – and www.AMensProject.blogspot.com for my efforts – and http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf – for a most important (US – CDC) study on violence issues.
Joel Sax
12/25/11 at 05:01 PM #
What does one forgive in an alcoholic or drug addict? This is a tough question to answer. I would add to it, what does one defend in a person with mental illness who did not take his meds at one time?

I’ve known people who skip in and out of their addiction. They keep hurting people, though maybe not to the scale that Hugo did. This month they are sober and next month they are back on the juice. Or they cycle in and out of taking their meds.

Many people with mental illness will tell you that they don’t like the bondage of medication. Certain alcoholics will tell you that they should not be denied the pleasure of drink. We like to tell each other that we are not responsible for what we did while we were in the grip of the disease. I think that is a fatal approach. I believe that we should take full responsibility for what happened.

I know I have done things — not as bad as what Hugo did — but bad enough that I have severed contacts for the sake of protection of others from PTSD. When those I have hurt contact me to make friends again, I refer them to my wife. I have trouble enough forgiving myself for some things. Even though my therapist reminds me that I didn’t actually carry through, I feel that I must impose upon myself the strictures of being a pariah. Threats and yelling can be very hard on people. I made lives hell.

But there’s something in my therapist’s standard — which does allow for accountability and responsibility. I say “I did these things. My illness explains but does not excuse what happened.”She deems it worthwhile to reach the place of forgiveness for myself. But it has been very hard.

I cannot help but admire anyone else who has taken up the challenge and persisted at it.

I believe that Hugo accepts that sober or not, he was the author of his suicide and the attempted murder of his girlfriend. He has maintained sobriety for 13 years. Third, I would add, it appears that he has not stalked his victim. I think these three things are sufficient grounds for saying that Hugo deserves to be held accountable, but forgiven.
meredith
12/25/11 at 02:46 PM #
well, as a (conventionally attractive, if it matters?) young woman who has been flirted with by hugo on facebook in a very much unwelcomed/drive-by manner a couple of years ago, i’m not thinking he has changed much in the creeper department. sorry. he doesn’t know me from jane in real life—we’ve never met. i live across the country. he friended me on facebook when i used to comment on his blog (and not with my full name either, though my email address contains my full name) and commented multiple times on my pictures, including one picture on which he commented how good i looked in a bizarre manner, considering that i was wearing something not all that flattering and he didn’t seem to be joking? forgive me if i don’t really believe these stories about how much he’s chaaaanged.
delphyne
12/25/11 at 02:27 PM #
If Schwyzer is truly sorry for his past actions, he’ll pay a visit to Pasadena police station and make a full confession about what he did, including lying to the police officers who came to the crime scene.

His supporters should expect nothing less of him if they truly believe he’s changed. At the moment his lie still stands, his crime goes unpunished and his victim has received no justice for what he did to her.
evil fizz
12/25/11 at 01:21 AM #
Clarisse, I guess I’m confused then. I get not wanting to moderate a toxic thread and/or deal with hate mail. What I do not understand is then writing a second post which stokes the flames but doesn’t allow for engagement at Feministe. Yes, it’s your call, but surely you can see why this isn’t being read in a constructive way, right?

I read Hugo’s piece on trying to murder his ex when it was first published and it is in large part why I stopped reading his blog and following him on Twitter. Doing it is one thing. Writing about it in the context of being a negligent pet sitter was too damn much. (And oddly enough, I didn’t think of his ex first, I thought if his wife and daughter: do they know he’s putting this shit out there? Oh, wait, his kid’s not even 3. Hopefully the way back machine won’t bite her in the ass.)
Old hen
12/24/11 at 07:11 PM #
“<em>What would you do if, tomorrow, you found out that your best friend was a rapist? Your lover? What would you do if your sibling came to you to confess a terrible crime? To request absolution? To request accountability?</em>”

Turn them in, obviously. They’d get no absolution from me and I’m in no position to grant “accountability” – that role belongs to their victim(s), surely? Oooops, sorry – I think I just mentioned the unmentionable and took the shining light away from the star of the show…

As a feminist, I refuse to collude in any attempt to help any rapist, pedophile, misogynist or (attempted) murderer of women feel better about his past “mistakes” – even if I know him. Also, as a feminist, when I see/read creepy “pro-feminist” misogyny, I steer well clear.
Anonyous Female
12/24/11 at 03:33 PM #
“Have you thought about these questions in your own life?” I used to date this guy who I later found out was a registered sex offender, 2 counts of indecent assault and battery which means forcibly groping someone. The thing is though, when we were together I knowingly did BDSM stuff to him that he’d told me not to do because it triggered memories of his abusive dad. And I am thinking of re-contacting him which I’m sure most women will say I shouldn’t do b/c he’s bad news but then again what am I? The community doesn’t know for the most part about either of our acts. I could spread his over town if he moved back to where I am but if he was with me and I did that, they’d probably judge me just for being with him, never mind what I’ve done. I don’t know. What does each of us deserve?
Emily Guy Birken
12/24/11 at 11:05 AM #
The fiction book The Shape of Snakes by Minette Walters does a very nice job of discussing this very issue. The main character is a married woman who is working to solve a 20 year old crime, and also deal with the aftermath of her getting involved in the crime at the time, including the fact that her husband raped her (resulting in a pregnancy and child). There is a sense that forgiveness is possible for some horrific crimes and yet there is a line that must be drawn—mainly for those individuals who show no remorse for their crimes.
Alexandra
12/24/11 at 05:20 AM #
You know, I skipped the last comment thread about this – I was too busy in another highly contentious thread on Feministe running concurrently.

I don’t know anything about Hugo Schwyzer, but I know a bit about recovering alcoholics, because my father is one.

My father has changed a lot since he started going to AA – he hasn’t touched liquor in a year, and there’s been less fighting in the house. There’s been no physical violence.

But.

Everything that was wrong with my father while he was drinking is still wrong with him – except now he isn’t drinking. That means he’s still the same person who threatened to kill my mother, who broke her eardrum and threw her against the kitchen floor.

And I know he’s still the same person because he still does shitty, misogynistic things. He still bullies my mother and treats her like she’s crazy.

Being in recovery has been a positive, there’s no doubt about it, but some aspects of my father’s recovery have been trying, and among them is this idea he’s gotten that since he’s “living amends” (ie, not hitting people or getting into drunken fights all the time) people don’t have the right to still be angry at him.

Now, I’m a big fan of forgiveness. I feel a hundred billion times better now that I’ve learned how to forgive people, even people I’ll never say, “I forgive you,” to, like the man who raped me. But I don’t like people telling me that there’s something wrong with me if I haven’t chosen, yet, to let go of my anger over wrongs I’ve seen done, whether to me or to someone I love.

So that’s what I think about change, about addicts, and about forgiveness. People can change, but just quitting drinking won’t change the stinking thinking (as they say at AA). And even though al-Anon might talk about forgiveness, or at least letting go and letting God, nobody on the AA side of the tracks should be telling someone on the Al-Anon side of the tracks when to start forgiving.

And frankly I don’t think friends of abusers should spend much time defending abusers in feminist spaces. I mean, what’s up with that?!
Darque
12/23/11 at 06:28 PM #
What do Tom Matlack and Hugo Schwyzer have in common?

They dared to hold views sympathetic to feminism while being men. Not only that, they dared, <em> dared </em> to have those voices prominently heard.

Oops. I guess the secret is that feminism doesn’t really want male involvement – because that would require tempering it’s radicalism.
tinfoil hattie
12/23/11 at 05:17 PM #
People can change, but I don’t think Schwyzer has. I don’t know why it’s so important to care about some narcissistic white dude, either. Why the big investment in him and what he thinks?
Jennifer
12/23/11 at 03:56 PM #
I don’t have strong opinions on the Schwyzer thing myself, but obviously others do. I’m a regular reader at feministe, and other recent threads have had hundreds of comments, some angry in tone with commenters going at each other and making pretty serious accusations about potentially criminal behavior as well as doling out psychological diagnoses (at least as much as was done with Schwyzer). So, I can imagine why people would feel surprised at being cut off or like you were going out of your way to keep people from talking negatively about Schwyzer. That does not, of course, justify hateful personal messages. Schwyzer himself seems willing to endure a lot of criticism—and he gets it from all sides. Because he makes himself such a part of his writing, criticisms of him are often personal. I hadn’t previously looked at the thread but just did and felt a little sad that it was cut off—I was interested to hear people’s thoughts and I wish that the people who complained to you privately had posted their feelings on the thread itself so that their reactions could have been part of the discussion. My sense was that people were not solely judging Schwyzer’s past behavior, but that some felt that the way Schwyzer expresses himself currently is an indication that he has not changed—that he uses his colorful past to garner attention in the present and appears to reflect more on how his past has affected him than how it may have affected others, and that this is not something they want to read about or see held up as an example of feminist thought. I think it’s a valid point, though personally I like some of his writing and I believe in evaluating ideas apart from personalities.

As far as your last questions, I believe people can change but I’m not sure that anyone can help them in doing so—the desire, motivation and work have to come from within. If you are implying that people have a responsibility to help other people change if they claim a desire to change, I don’t agree.

It’s true that if environments are too punitive, people won’t talk about transgressions and learning can’t occur—this is a big issue with workplace safety/medical errors, etc. But I don’t think this is the case with violence against women—it’s not that perpetrators face a society that thinks they’ve done something unspeakable, it’s that too many people are still cheering them on or asking what their victims did to bring it on themselves, and that getting this culture to change is what feminists are currently working on.
jfrie
12/23/11 at 02:47 PM #
he seems like a pretty baller ally now, and we could use all the male allies we can get. what man hasn’t hurt women at some point or other? learning and moving forward must be allowed and legitimized if we want men to participate in gender liberation and anti-sexism.
Clarisse Thorn
12/23/11 at 02:32 PM #
To anyone who asserts that I’m a bad person for not dealing with other feminists’ angre about this —

You know what, people can be as angry as they want about this, but I WILL NOT put my own mental health on the line by forcing myself to deal with hatemail, toxic comment threads, etc. That’s not a feminist act either; this whole affair has seriously decreased my health and productivity this week and I. AM. DONE. And as far as I know, there isn’t anyone else currently writing at Feministe who wants to be involved in further discussion either. I really am committed to working with abuse survivors, but that commitment ends where I wake up in the morning feeling sick to my stomach and can’t work all day.

And for God’s sake, the internet is a big place. You are all welcome to have these conversations in your own spaces, and some of you obviously ARE.
LotusBen
12/23/11 at 02:09 PM #
Sure, people can change. But not everyone chooses to change. And occassionally, people will pretend they’ve changed to get others off their back, when in fact they haven’t changed, or at least not to the extent they lead people to believe.

I think there’s a lot of problematic assumptions in this post. I don’t think it’s a good idea for people to “work for forgiveness.” If someone wants to change aspects of their behavior, I think it’s only really a good idea and only really will be successful if they do it for themselves. If they recognize, when they’re being honest with themselves, that this change is, in fact, in their own best self-interest. If a man is truly tired of abusing women, he should stop abusing women, but he should do that for intrinsic reasons that have nothing to do with how others judge him. In my opinion, he shouldn’t be trying to prove he’s “good” in order to earn (read: manipulate people into receiving) “forgiveness.” To do so would be operating from the same controlling, boundary-violating mindset that enabled him to abuse women in the first place.

And as others have pointed out, no one’s obligated to interact with another person. If someone’s violated your trust you’re perfectly entitled to never see or talk to them again. And you’re also entitled to want to have nothing to do with someone who, based off everything you know or read about him, seems untrustworthy. And being a respected feminist guru is not a birthright. I don’t see people saying Mr. Schwyzer should be flogged, or imprisoned, or even fired. But they are saying people are correct to dislike and criticize him, and that maybe he should reconsider the role he plays within the feminist movement.

There’s a lot of things i’ve done in my life that I’m not proud of. And I truly empathize with people who get cast aside or rejected by society because of things they’ve done. I don’t support the prison system; I don’t support the marginalization of people who’ve been addicts or committed crimes. But Mr. Schwyzer is hardly facing those outcomes. He’s currently an exalted leader, and people are merely saying maybe he doesn’t deserve to be.
Ruthie
12/23/11 at 01:28 PM #
This is a great post that captures the key part of this discussion about Hugo. Most of the criticism I’ve read seems to stem from whether or not people think he’s genuinely changed, or whether or not he has a right to speak, even about his own life. I’ve read that he speaks too much about things he doesn’t KNOW know about because he’s a man, but then he gets criticized for writing too much about his own experience. I’ve read that he’s sleezy now because he did many questionable things in the past that he hasn’t “apologized [or been] accountable” for, but he regularly expresses that those things are wrong and that he’s worked or continuing to work out that behavior with those who it directly affected, and that in the event that those people weren’t willing to forgive him he had to accept and respect their feelings since they were his victims, which is exactly correct.

I really don’t see how accusations that he really hasn’t changed are grounded. Now, he has done completely effed up stuff, no one denies that. And I don’t think any of his supporters — certainly I’m not — are justifying or excusing his actions that were wrong/unethical/morally depraved (pick your adjective). But I know I want to learn from them, to have some insight into what drives such behavior, not to excuse it, but to stop others from doing it — sometimes to stop MYSELF from doing it, because I recognize some of that darkness inside me, even if it isn’t the exact same. What I’ve seen from him suggests he really is changed and trying to stay on an ethical path and help others who want to listen to him.

Now, many will say and have said that’s he hasn’t changed enough. That’s legit. I’m not suggesting imposing my, or anyone else’s, standards onto other readers, particularly those whose past experiences created perfectly justified caution and suspicion. I’m not saying those people don’t have many good points — they do, and I want to hear them.

But I want to hear Hugo’s points too. I might not, and don’t always, like them or agree with them, but many I do like and do agree with and I want him to be part of the discussion. That doesn’t mean not holding him accountable. It does mean he can be a part of the conversation — read, heard and shot down like anyone else.

Suggesting that reading Hugo isn’t feminist, or that he shouldn’t speak or be listened to, suggesting that OTHERS shouldn’t hear him no matter what your criticism of him is, grounded as it may be, is dictating others’ behavior. I agree with Christina that there’s a difference between forgiving, forgetting and trusting, but I am not arguing anyone should forgive, forget about his actions or trust him if it goes against their instincts.

But neither should I, or any other readers, be told NOT to forgive or trust him if we judge it correct. Why is the criticism and suspicion OK but the trust isn’t?

The fact is that there IS no “spokesperson” for feminism, male or female. There wasn’t a nominating convention or a vote. Hugo is held up as a speaker because people listen to him. It’s that simple. From my perspective, I listen to him because I find a lot of value in what he has to say. I think he’s honest and he doesn’t try to hide or gloss over even the darkest parts of himself. That works for me.

I can completely understand why many of the things he writes about are triggering and even offensive to others who have different experiences, many of them personal ones that for justifiable reasons are very emotionally explosive. Those who react that way have just as legitimate a reaction, and just as justifiable emotions, as do I and those who connect with Hugo differently. I don’t want to discount their experiences or exclude them or tell them how they should feel about him or not to tell me how they feel, because I have heard criticism of him and his work that has helped me process his writing and perspectives differently, and it’s super valuable.

But there’s no way that “do you believe/read/trust Hugo” should be a measuring stick for feminism or the legitimacy of feminist blogs or whatever.
Smhll
12/23/11 at 12:24 PM #
Since I didn’t know anything about Hugo’s reputation yesterday, I thought his essay about leaving Good Man Project was good. But hearing his history really makes me think. It’s intriguing that a man who has done very bad things and has grappled with guilt has a different mode of dealing with guilt than other people. I think men who have always been well behaved, really writhe and fight if they feel like someone tries to drape the mantle of male guilt on their shoulders. They feel no reason to feel guilty due to their individual innocence. (Kind of reasonable.) I just wonder if being a truly guilty man who has admitted his sins makes it more possible to participate in feminist spaces where all straight men are at least “guilty” of having some privilege. (Or even guilty of not even noticing they have privilege and getting argumentative about it.)
Fang
12/23/11 at 12:21 PM #
you’ve written a lot about accountability, but this post reads a lot like you trying to escape accountability for hurting a lot of the feministe readers. You’ve further insulted us by accusing us of not having any good reason to accept him as a relevant feminist voice, when he has quite a bit of writing out there in the public for us to see and analyze.

At least have the decency to treat feminist women as intelligent human beings who have reasons for their reactions to a man who wants to be part of our movement.