The buzz in Pasadena this past week has been over the arrest of a veteran teacher at local Mayfield School (a Catholic college prep school for girls) on charges of possessing child pornography. David Hassler, 62, who taught government, history, and religion, is on administrative leave after police found numerous printed images of child porn in his home, most apparently downloaded from the Internet. Mayfield, to its great credit, has been proactive in its response in terms of hosting forums and reaching out to its students, parents, and alumni to keep everyone informed.
In my eight years as a youth leader at All Saints Church, I worked with many girls who were Mayfield students. (A perhaps surprisingly high percentage of the teens in our Episcopal youth group were Catholic school students). I’ve also had a number of Mayfield alumnae in my classes here at the college. In the past week, since the news about Mr. Hassler broke, I’ve spoken to perhaps half a dozen young women, both current and former Mayfield students. One emailed me on Facebook to tell me what had happened, saying that she was stunned and upset and needed to talk. The reaction to the teacher’s arrest among the girls I’ve spoken with has ranged from shock to anger to concern for Mr. Hassler and what will happen to him. But there is a palpable sense of betrayal, and, in the words of one Mayfielder who wrote me this weekend, “an ugly feeling that I just can’t trust the way I did before.”
This post is not about David Hassler or child pornography. It’s about teachers and trust and the basic truth that if we want to be trusted, there must be radical coherence between our public values and our private behavior. When something like this happens in my community (and this sort of thing happens in many communities) I get angry. I get angry as a man who works with young people, because the David Hasslers of the world poison the well for those of us who are making a huge effort to earn the trust of kids and their parents. We live in a world that is frantic about the threat posed to children by sexual predators of one sort or another; in the public imagination, and rightly so, most of those predators are men. And sexual predators have time and again sought out positions of authority over young people in order to facilitate their own acting out. The secret lives of a few, when made public, make suspects of the many who are working so damn hard to love, nurture, and mentor young people in safe and healthy ways.
I’ve spoken to a couple of Hassler’s former students in the past couple of days. One girl said to me Monday: “Now I wonder what he was thinking about when he looked at me. It makes me feel so disgusting, as if my memories of Mayfield are being ruined. I know I’ll get over it, but right now, it’s just so shocking and upsetting and vile.” But even in her shock, this young woman couldn’t come out and say she was angry at Hassler. “I just keep thinking about him, and worrying about him. I’ve been afraid he’s going to hurt himself or something because of how awful this must be to have everyone know this. Is it weird that I’m so upset but also worried about him?” I assured her that hers was a very normal reaction, and that her anger — if it comes at all — may not come for a long time.
Watching this story unfold strengthens my conviction that in the end, our private lives are never really private. What we do in our own home, behind locked doors, bleeds into our public lives. I don’t have any interest in child pornography, and I never did. But thinking about David Hassler reminds me that everything I do matters. My students and mentees don’t need to know much about my private life. But if I am insensitive to my wife, if I nurture a secret porn addiction, if I relapse on drugs, if I cheat on my taxes or am cruel to small animals, those sins will, sooner or later, lessen my effectiveness as a teacher and a mentor and a friend. The young people in my life don’t need to see the details of what goes on behind closed doors. But if what goes on behind those doors is deceptive, exploitative, illegal or cruel, then sooner or later, those young people whose trust I seek will pay a public price for my own private misdeeds.
We lie to ourselves when we claim that we can compartmentalize with impunity. Though I can’t prove it, I suspect that David Hassler lied to himself about his child porn use. Perhaps he told himself that as long as his students and his colleagues never found out, he could still be a good, safe, effective teacher. But it rarely works that way. His students — and indeed, the entire Mayfield community — are reeling from these very serious allegations. But believing what I do believe about the human person, I am convinced that the darkness Hassler’s double life engendered was already affecting those around him long before he was arrested. And I grieve that for him, and I grieve it more for the young women who this week have felt so shocked, so shattered, so betrayed.
Not personally knowing anyone involved, I’m much more concerned about the students- past and present- of the first grade teacher who was in a position to really hurt people very permanently. The students at Mayfield have the ability to understand what Hassler did, and the opportunity for misconduct is (hopefully) near non-existent at a college prep, Catholic school. However, the opportunity for misconduct in the case of Kothe is far more dangerous, in my opinion.
Though as far as your point goes, I agree. In my experience, the private life of educators especially, is never truly private.
However, the secret lives of a wayward few also give people a healthy sense of suspicion. Perhaps I’m being a bit cynical, but not all people are good people, and some bad people are impressively deceptive.
I’m not sure where I was going with any of those ideas anymore. -insert traditional week before finals excuse-
I find a certain amount - okay, a considerable amount - of cognitive dissonance between your assertion here and in another recent post about Mssr. Jensen on the need for private and public morality to reflect each other, and your past “Yeah, but” defense of Bill Clinton (And the enabling behavior of Mrs. Clinton) in his serial predation of women.
I posted last night before I retired, and was terse - lest you take that as a drive by criticism, allow me to expand:
But if what goes on behind those doors is deceptive, exploitative, illegal or cruel, then sooner or later, those young people whose trust I seek will pay a public price for my own private misdeeds.
Truer words aren’t spoken, Hugo, and is why I place no trust in the Republicrat parties - I find it hypocritical he and deplorable the way they excuse the misdeeds of their own in the name of political expediency. It’s also why I don’t take mainstream feminism seriously - it’s only fringes which came out in unequivocated condemnation of Bill’s behavior - and that just includes the confirmed stuff, let alone the allegations, all of which are most likely only the tip of the iceberg.
And the word “unequivocal” is important - at a certain point one has to say “This is fruit from a poisonous tree.”
This adds to the rambling comment theme, but I got rather motivated after reading this post this morning-
Sex offenders as individuals have been made the scapegoat not just for the failures of communities in specific regards to sex crimes (so often the people who helped the sex crime take place get to label themselves as co-victims rather than co-conspirators), but for the failures of individuals and the community as a whole. The level of rage isn’t about the sex crime, it is just the new version of communists or whowever else is responsible for all sin.
What enrages me, as the victim of a pedophile (which is only relevant insofar as it somewhat explains “rage”), about this, is the lie that this undifferentiated rage is about the sex crime. Because honest rage would lead to honest action. This dishonesty just puts more power into the dishonesty required to allow sex crimes.
So, there are two things specifically about the post that enrage me. The first is just the general topic: once the guy bought his first piece of child porn, there was nowhere he could go. We have made it impossible for someone whose nuclear power plant of sexual energy says “children” to get help privately (therapy), or in any slightly less private setting to seek the help and support of close friends. (Contrast this with the known epileptic who recently killed two people with his automobile, but medical privacy prevents a doctor from contacting the DMV.)
Second is the idea that thoughts and behaviors are the same thing, and that girls/women should be quivering innocents afraid of men’s sexual thoughts (when they are actual innocents, they don’t know of them, after they are not innocent, they are not innocent). The man behaved honorably where he acted appropriately with his students; he behaved dishonerably where he purchased the porn. This, “Did he think of me sexually?” Maybe he did; who cares. I think the proper response to the young woman is You think of lots of people sexually that you shouldn’t, and all we grade you on is your behavior. I do not like this idea of encouraging victimhood over the possibility that you might be seen as sexual; the only next answer to that is to put on a burkha.
I just had to say something in response to the last comment. I usually don’t like to interject my opinion against another poster’s comment, but I just had to this time. This also applies to the post.
This, “Did he think of me sexually?” Maybe he did; who cares. I think the proper response to the young woman is You think of lots of people sexually that you shouldn’t, and all we grade you on is your behavior. I do not like this idea of encouraging victimhood over the possibility that you might be seen as sexual; the only next answer to that is to put on a burkha.
This is a gross misunderstanding of the issue. First off, I’ll say I was the victim of more than one pedophile in my childhood so I can understand this rage from that aspect, too. Having this “Did he think of me sexually?” reaction is totally valid. A kid getting lusted after is NOTHING like an adult being lusted after. Two adults having a one sided or mutual lust is okay because both the adults have the agency to understand and control the situation appropriately (hopefully). It is expected that your peers may try and get you in the sack so you put up appropriate boundaries…assuming the sack is not somewhere you wish to end up.
Kids don’t have this, especially against a teacher. Kids trust their teachers and let down certain barriers they might have with other people because it is (supposed to be) a given that a students doesn’t have to worry about a teacher trying to do things with them sexually. The same thing goes for adults in general when it comes to kids.
When you hear a teacher was a pedophile who at least had child pornography, you wonder if that teacher was really just being nice or if they were trying to “get” something from you. Did they come and talk to you when you had a bad day because they cared or because they wanted to sleep with you? For smaller kids, it’s even worse because they understand so much less than younger teens. This distinction makes a difference. It makes kids feel like they have to consider if their teacher is trying to “hit on” them, and this totally destroys the student/teacher trust structure. It doesn’t even necessarily stop at the very young.
Sophomore year of college I had a professor hit on me for the first time during his office hours and I was distraught and disappointed afterwards on a deep level. I never asked him for help or talked to him about the material again that semester. Yeah, I’m nineteen, etc, etc, but the student/teacher trust was broken. I had to consider that if I came to office hours again I’d have to wonder if he was genuinely interested in helping me or just trying to get me to meet him for a drink off campus. If I turned him down would it affect my grade? The kind of trust people give teachers is like the trust you give your parents, in my opinion, and even when actions aren’t “illegal” they can still be wrong and harmful.
So, it’s not about girls feeling like they should have to suppress their sexualities and dress from head to toe, but feeling like they should be able to trust their teachers not to try and cross the line with them. Hassler being a pedophile in itself is not the problem. I agree that people with pedophilic urges should be able to get help without fear of persecution. The point is he already crossed the line of illegality by possessing child porn (the illegality makes it separate from men who buy regular porn). When it comes to sexual crimes, the first illegal act tends to be a slippery slope to justifying more illegal acts in the same vein. So, I think their feelings were justified.
PS - I don’t think anyone is being encouraged to feel victimized as it was a girl who told Hugo she felt that way. No one told her to feel that way.
Jennyfields, indeed — I read your comment just after that from ms, and agree with your fisking. As a male teacher who cares deeply about the young men and women with whom I work, I care about maintaining trust. And that starts in my head before it goes to my actions.
While I agree that the basis for honorable action starts in the head, I’m left still thinking that it is the action that ultimately matters. A college prof who hits on you (and I certainly understand how upsetting inappropriate adult behavior can be, even when you yourself are an adult or close to) is different from the college prof Hugo previous described making lists of the attractiveness of his students (actively indulging his thinking, even if hidden), which is different from one who notices whatever he happens to notice, but behaves appropriately, something he is (as jennyfields points out) unilaterally responsible for controlling.
I question the slippery-slope arguement (and there are some good statistics for that- it is definately not a settled question) and still think that if a person with this problem contained his criminal behavior to pornography, that was a win. A win while losing big time, but stll a win.
still think that if a person with this problem contained his criminal behavior to pornography, that was a win. A win while losing big time, but stll a win.
Huh? Ms, we’re talking about child pornography which involves images of kids being abused. So maybe Hassler didn’t lay a hand on a girl himself. Big whoop. He outsourced the abuse, and got his thrills from watching what he didn’t do himself. That’s not virtue or self-restraint, that’s cowardice.
Yeah, just had to reiterate that. Possessing child pornography is abuse in and of itself. Adult pornography is made by adults and the exploitative quality of it is up for debate, but child pornography is always exploitive. By buying/seeking out child porn, you’re directly contributing to abuse by creating a market. I’ve had people try and argue that possession is a victim-less crime, and they are wrong. Using child pornography means you’ve already crossed a line because you’re watching an actual child being sexually exploited/raped and not only not reporting it but asking for more. So, he did do wrong in his actions and no one won, even if he didn’t touch any of his students. Those little girls in the photos lost.
I don’t think that it’s possible to claim that I was making an argument in favor of child pornography. :-/
Courage is not about grabbing one’s own child, of course; courage is about authentically taking on the problem. That not only requires calling upon the virtue of the person with the desires, it also requires calling upon the virtue of the community- both of which have failed. His failure is obvious. Our failure is creating a culture where, as I said, once he acquired that first piece he could never win because no matter how he exercised virtue in restraint (and by far the best virtue would have been to declare a crisis right at the beginning, before acquiring anything) our response is somewhere on the continuum between maim & kill slowly and “big whoop”.