Another issue that came up in Saturday’s WAM session on “breaking the hold of the Old Boys Club” was that of mentoring. Ann Friedman brought up the often-problematic, often-rewarding experience of being mentored by older men. In her field, journalism, the majority of senior writers and editors are male; it simply wouldn’t be possible for her to seek out only women as mentors, as there aren’t enough of them around yet. Though the topic came up only briefly, several of the women on the panel talked about being hit on by “creepy” older men, but also about having had very kind, safe, nurturing older fellows play a welcome and vital role in their professional growth.
One of the things Ann said, before we moved on to other subjects, was something like “It’s difficult for a man, as a mentor, to send the right signal about his willingness to mentor a younger woman. Should he come right out and say ‘I’m not hitting on you, but I am interested in working with you’, or should he leave it alone? That’s a hard one.” Everyone else agreed, and since the topic of the workshop was not “how can older men safely mentor younger women”, we moved on to other things. After all, I was the only man over 25 in the whole auditorium.
I divide my mentoring work into multiple categories. In various church settings, I’ve worked with teens and young adults as a volunteer youth pastor. Here at the college, I’ve mentored students and, increasingly, junior colleagues. The mentoring with students is both academic and personal. Because I teach gender studies, and offer courses on emotionally charged, sensitive subjects like sexuality, GLBTQ history, and “the body”, I have an obligation to be present for students as they work through the various issues that these classes can bring up inside of them. Any given semester, I would guess that I’m actively mentoring around a dozen current students, as well as current and former youth group kids. Some come to my office hours, I meet others — when I can — for coffee and lunch.
Off the top of my head, I’d say two-thirds of the people I mentor are women. Pasadena City College is already 56% female, and my gender studies courses — from whose ranks most of my mentees come — are 70-90% female. Add in the cultural forces that make it more likely for women to ask for help when they need it, and it makes good sense that the majority of my mentees would be female. Most of my mentees are, these days, young enough to be my children. The students I am working closest with this year were born between 1986-89, the years in which I was a college student.
I did “cross a line” on more than one occasion in my early years of teaching. Though I haven’t had a sexual relationship with a student in a decade, since that awful spring semester of 1998, the memory of what I once was still impacts how I mentor today. As I’ve written about many times before, I had a kind of spiritual and moral rebirth ten years ago this summer; my commitment to observing good and safe boundaries was born then. In the first two years after my conversion experience, say between 1998 and early 2000, I was very reluctant to do any mentoring at all. It took me two years to figure out how to set really excellent and appropriate boundaries, and until I was able to do that, I decided that the best strategy was to withdraw.
When I started actively mentoring again, around the summer of 2000, the driving concern I had was to be truly “safe”. I was obsessed with the dynamics of safe mentoring, and I approached several older men and women whom I admired for their own mentoring skills. I listened to their advice, incorporating some of their suggestions. I made a few mistakes along the way, particularly early on. Because I was so eager to draw a clear and bright line between the “new” and “old” Hugos, I tended to say things like this to prospective mentees, the sort who had been coming to see me for a while: “Perhaps you’ve heard about my reputation. I did cross the line with students in the past, but I haven’t done that in a while and I never will again. I want you to know that my interest in you is entirely non-sexual.” While some of the young women I worked with seemed to appreciate that level of candor, others were taken aback. One said: “Hugo, I don’t know why you even had to mention that. Bringing it up is creepier than not saying anything at all.”
I quickly stopped referring to my past, only acknowledging it when students brought it up themselves. I discovered that that kind of blunt disclosure was more about my needs than my mentees. Especially as I’ve grown older, and more of my students are likely to place me in the role of a father figure, I’ve grown less and less inclined to issue a specific disavowal of sexual interest at the beginning of a mentoring relationship. After all, most fathers don’t tell their daughters: “I want you to know I’m not going to sexualize our relationship”! And while I’m not actually a father to any of the women and men with whom I work, I’ve come to realize that for many, any reference to sexual dynamics comes across as “squicky”.
On the other hand, I’ve found that for a few students — particularly those who are accustomed to being sexualized by older men — a gentle, firm, and brief statement of sexual non-interest is very helpful. Last year, I started working with a prospective women’s studies major, nineteen years old. She had been sexually abused by her father from age six to sixteen, and had a troubled and flamboyant sexual history. She was also a first-rate student. When she first started coming to see me, she was very flirtatious, to the point of trying to press her body against me whenever she visited. It was fairly obvious to me that she wasn’t genuinely sexually interested in me; rather, she had developed the notion that the only way to get attention from men was to eroticize the relationship. With this gal, what I needed to do was say very gently and very firmly, “I care about you, your work, and your life. I’m not interested in you sexually and I will never allow our relationship to become sexual.” She flushed pink for just a moment, and then her body almost sagged with relief. Where once she had come to see me in full make-up and a miniskirt, she began coming in sweats. She seemed much more at ease, much more trusting, and we still work closely to this day. In this instance, being explicit about what my boundaries were was crucial.
Bottom line: in my continuing quest to be a safe, trustworthy, loving mentor to my current and former students and youth group kids, I have learned that different young women need different degrees of reassurance as to my motives. The “explicit disavowal” is immensely helpful to some, off-putting to others. I’m not a mind-reader, of course, so I’m never going to do this perfectly. But as the years go by, and I get grayer and wiser, I’m developing better and better intuition about “who needs what.” (This is where my Myers-Briggs ENFP really, really proves to be an asset.) I’m working on that same intuition with hugging. Some of my mentees want to be hugged, need to be hugged, ought to be hugged. Some would find a hug to be invasive and wildly inappropriate. I have one young woman I’ve mentored for four years, who is about to graduate from USC; I’ve never so much as shaken her hand. I’ve got others who’ve cried in my arms in my office. There simply isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach to hugs, and there isn’t one to negotiating “safe space”. The moment we adopt a uniform standard, we risk losing relationship with one group of students or mentees whose needs are not met by that standard.
I understand that in this current climate, many men in academia or corporate leadership are reluctant to mentor young women. Feminists can say, over and over again, that the risk of a false charge of sexual harassment is infinitely lower than the men’s rights activists imagine, but our reassurances don’t seem to have much impact on some guys. Of course, if fear of litigation does act as a deterrrant to harassers, lechers, and boors, so much the better. But those of us who have experience and wisdom to share must be willing to do so, even if that means quieting our own anxieties. We must be willing, of course, to be honest with ourselves about our own motives as “senior” men mentoring young women. But, if we’ve done our work as adults, we’ll be able to work closely with a mentee, a student, or an employee without fear of having our sexual desire emerge without warning. And if we’re willing to set good boundaries, and make those boundaries verbally explicit, then we can do the vital work of raising up the next generation in our chosen fields.
In the end, all of us who have achieved some degree of success have a moral obligation to help those who wish to follow in our footsteps. And we must be willing to offer that help irrespective of the race or sex of the one who needs our mentoring. That means courage, that means clarity, and it means making and sticking to some world-class, kick-ass boundaries.
UPDATE: At the risk of making an already long post longer: it’s important to acknowledge that we have control, much more than most of us admit, over the non-verbal sexual cues we send. Most of us “know how to flirt” non-verbally; a great many of us, over the years, have become astute (though hardly perfect) readers of the cues others send. We can also make a conscious decision to “turn off” those cues, even in the presence of someone we might, in a different context, find attractive. Part of good mentoring, it should be stressed, is the steadfast commitment to silencing that sexual part of oneself. This isn’t repression, just healthy and loving redirection.
Thank you for this. It is really creepy when professors and instructors hit on their students.
As Gavin de Becker put it well, a decent man doesn’t have to tell you he’s decent; he simply behaves in an appropriate manner from the moment you meet him and as long as you know him.
There are probably some students who need to be reassured, but wouldn’t it be better to simply reassure them that you expect and will maintain a purely professional student-teacher relationship, rather than saying “I’m not going to sleep with you”? That’s a little TMI.
Agreed, Mythago — that’s why I rarely do it unless I sense that it’s helpful to do so. And sometimes, that kind of explicit reassurance really is needed. But most times, you’re right, it’s not.
Agree with Sugarmag. Thanks and thanks again.
“Honesty is such a lonely word
everyone is so untruuuueeee
Honesty is hardly ever heard
And mostly what I need from youuuu…”
— Billy Joel
Well said, Hugo, well said.
“There simply isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach to hugs, and there isn’t one to negotiating “safe space”. The moment we adopt a uniform standard, we risk losing relationship with one group of students or mentees whose needs are not met by that standard.”
I think this is what freaks MRAs out–they don’t know how to or can’t handle dealing with women as, you know, the individual people they are, so they clamor for a clear, non-negotiable RULE for interfacing with them. In order to protect themselves, of course, not to actually productively engage with other individuals.
Hi Hugo! This post is great. Thanks for your honesty. Knowing you has been a very reassuring, comforting experience for me, and you know I appreciate it. :)
we have control, much more than most of us admit, over the non-verbal sexual cues we send
This has me a bit worried. A long time ago (a year ago or more) you wrote a response to conservative Christians who chastise young women for `tempting’ men by wearing, I don’t know, tank tops and skirts above the knee or something like that. I need to think about how the arguments would go in more detail (for one thing, I haven’t gone back and looked for the old post yet), but it seems like, at the very least, you’re opening yourself to an uncharitable double standard charge here. That is, you’re requiring men to police our non-verbal sexual cues, but giving young women a free pass.
Wow, your categories are really nicely laid out. The `Modesty’ category had, not just the post I was looking for, but all three of the ones I’d run together in my mind. The most pertinent is this one, from July 2006.
In this post, you criticise a commenter at another blog, Jose, who writes `Improper or provocative attire is certainly a disruption and a distraction for which the tempter can and should be faulted. It can reach a point in which the priest or pastor should ask the tempter to leave the congregation.’ At the conclusion of that post, you summarise your response by saying
Deliberately attempting to provoke a married or otherwise committed person into lusting for you is, I think, genuine sin. But dressing for comfort or for aesthetic enjoyment without the intent of seduction is not sin, regardless of how those who view you happen to respond.
If this is taken out of context, we have you refusing to condemn women for not exercising self-control over their non-verbal sexual cues there, and condemning men for not exercising self-control over their non-verbal sexual cues here. Christian anti-feminist trolls (which are not the same folks as thoughtful Christian anti-feminist regulars) now start jumping up and down shouting `gotcha!’ and generally making a nuisance of themselves.
So, to head them off, I’ll finish this little two-part inadvertent soliloquy by quoting the more accurate (and adequate) statement of your response to Jose:
it is not “ignorance” for a woman to be unable to consider all of the possible ways in which a man might respond to her clothing. She might be able to guess that wearing a bikini to church might not be appropriate, but what of Mr. Smith with his foot fetish, who will be transfixed by her feet in open-toed sandals? It’s absurd to accuse women of sinful ignorance for being unable to anticipate all of the possible reactions their sartorial choices may inspire!
Thanks, Hilary.
Noumena, I wrote in today’s post about the kind of signals we send out deliberately as part of intentional flirting, not of what we do that might be misinterpreted. Thanks for some good quotes to clear up the misperception!
This is a great post, Hugo, and frankly a helpful one for me to read. This is something I have an irrationally hard time chilling out about. A few years ago a young, female student was talking through some of the difficulties she was going through, as the occasional student is want to do from time to time. At one point she said something that invoked a strong emotional response of symathy and empathy, and I reached out to pat her shoulder or arm. Just as immediately, I recoiled, fearing how such a thing might be interpreted. Plenty of women have told me some version of what Mythago says above, but for some reason it’s really hard to internalize, and it pisses me off.
All the “old Hugos” out there aren’t just doing harm to the women they prey on, they’re doing harm to all of us who want to live in a society where greater trust and better relationships are possible across generational and gender divides.
I am appalled that, twenty years ago, I agreed to coach a girls’ soccer team. Worse, I continued to coach even though I couldn’t get a single parent to help me. IOW, to be a witness.
I would never do that now, not for the world.
And any kind of contact with women like “mentoring”? Not hardly. Not even if restricted to public spaces like the coffee shop.
I think this is what freaks MRAs out–they don’t know how to or can’t handle dealing with women as, you know, the individual people they are, so they clamor for a clear, non-negotiable RULE for interfacing with them. In order to protect themselves, of course, not to actually productively engage with other individuals.
What utter nonsense. Demonize much?
I don’t know about productively engaging. After all, what on Earth does a man have to offer, anyway?
Point is, false accusations of rape are said to be at 4%, which is horrid, up to 40%, depending on the source of the stats.
Sexual harassment is easier to charge–no forensics and no physical contact are necessary–harder to refute and are sometimes actionable in venues–employers, for example–where due process is absent.
So, until feminists and their supporters start working against the issue, most men will be playing it safe.
This does put feminists in a bind. Either men have something valuable to offer, or they do not. Find a feminist asserting the former. So, if there is nothing valuable in dealing with men, there’s hardly any reason to worry about men playing it safe at the cost of withholding whatever they have to offer.
Richard, you may not be familiar with the blog rules here — this is a feminist blog, run by and for feminists and their allies. Comments need to be congruent with that philosophy; attacks on feminism, as tempting as they may be to issue, can be put on any of the large number of men’s rights forums that exist in the blogosphere. Anti-feminist bromides will automatically be deleted.
Most feminists that I have worked with — and I have worked as a public feminist man since Reagan was in office — have welcomed me as an ally, and been eager to have men who were willing to be safe, loving, respectful mentors. Judging from your apparent hostility to feminism, however, I am glad that you have chosen not to work to mentor or coach young women any more. That may be safer for you, and I suspect better for them as well.
Actually, Hugo, most of the women I’ve worked with have appreciated it. A reunion of a civil rights group I worked with in the Sixties was interesting. My wife remarked that it was mostly women alums who wanted to sit with me at meals, or hang out and chat. They didn’t have any doubts. When things get sweaty, the big, ugly guys get some strokes.
I must say that some of it has been kind of…odd. When I helped chaperone kids traveling overseas, their female teachers particularly appreciated my help. “It’s the eyes,”, one of them said, referring to various bad actors who approached, and then left when I got in front of them.
I’ve physically broken up two assaults on women and looked off a couple of more. I don’t know as that counts, though.
My question remains: Other than telling a woman what female feminists have already said, what can a man offer as being a man?
I’m an ally. But I’m not stupid, either.
The problem with feminism in the context of mentoring is a complete lack of interest in ending false accusations.
And we had a pretty good season the year I had the girls’ team.
Women are safe from me, which is the question wrt mentoring, and safe with me, which is usually not considered. “Loving”? I can deal with people whom I do not love, or even like. Respectful? Courteous. Respect is earned.
But as to your comment about the mood here, of being safe for feminism, women might want to be aware of what men consider in mentoring, or practically any other issue which brings them together. There would be fewer misunderstandings. Which is supposed to be the point.
Shorter Richard: feminists are idiots, and chicks dig me.
I was, as you could see, replying to Hugo’s egregious suggestion that women are safer if I stay away from them.
However, if you wish to wear a sign insisting on no help, I’d be happy to stand there, hands in pockets, whistling, watching. Your call.
The question I am addressing is the conflict between men mentoring women and the possibility of false accusations of bad behavior. Do you want to respond to that?
In my work, I shake hands with female clients and vendors. The last time I did more than that with a colleague, she was having trouble putting a bandage on her index finger. Hugs are for family. Last exception: my wife and I stopped for a pickup truck on its side. The woman inside was stuck because the door was too heavy. I got her out. We sat in our car for a couple of hours awaiting help. Finally got the cop and the tow truck and we discussed ways and means. Got it done, I started to leave, she hugged me. First time outside the family in as long as I can remember. I figure, why take a chance?
So. The question: Possibility of false accusations puts men off. Your solution?
If put off, stay off. Mentor folks who won’t try and frame you for something; there must be some out there.
I agree that false accusations are bad, and even one is too many. But I suspect they are still rare, and the thing that’s needed first is helping build a society where real accusations are not likely to be needed.
A prospective mentor can put a sign on his or her door, or make an announcement on the first day of class if teaching, making clear that sexual flirtation or other involvement won’t be started or encouraged. Same thing with counselors. Many of the people coming in will be young and clueless. They need things made clear.
Don’t waste your time standing and watching (w/ or w/o whistling) someone who has said they don’t need your help. Go help someone who does.
Seems to me that a person who really has something to offer can do so while playing it safe.
Seems to me that a person who really has something to offer can do so while playing it safe.
Yup. It really is that simple.
Seems to me that a person who really has something to offer can do so while playing it safe.
Yup. It really is that simple.
Run that by your lawyers and see how far it gets you.
I agree that false accusations are bad, and even one is too many. But I suspect they are still rare,
Somewhere in your house you will find something with a label like the one on my iron, which says “Do not iron clothes while on body.”
This is because someone, somewhere, sued based on such a thing, and at least cost someone a whole lot of money defending the lawsuit over it.
I provide services to a lot of companies. As such, part of the requirement is to be familiar with their policies and procedures. Several have policies of supervisors not being alone with underlings of the opposite sex, as well as outside fraternization.
Puts a crimp in “Mentoring,” eh wot?
My goodness, Gonz, how do I get such a list so I can do my best to boycott the companies that use such a brutally dishonest approach to sexual harassment? Sexual harassment policies are designed to protect the vulnerable, and if they extend to the point that they actually bar mentoring between opposite sex managers and employees, they only enhance the discrimination they seek to prevent.
Hugo.
Wrong. Sexual harassment policies are designed to protect the employer against false accusations.
Our office has either cubicles or glass-fronted offices.
The insurance guys say you can count on a suit after a negative personnel matter regarding a woman employee.
That’s why they offer both insurance, and, if desired, generic manuals and policy directives.
Thing is, if a guy wants to harass, he can, no matter what the employer does. The issue is to avoid getting hammered when innocent.
Having the procedures manual means that it is difficult to claim the employer was blind to the possibility, and thus any employee who really does it is doing so knowing better.
I tend to suspect that false accusations are rare. If someone decides to harass they can generally do so. Depending on the corporate environment and their position they can do so with ease. If they are a manager or CEO the company will look the other way, especially if the victim is lower on compensation scale, which usually is always the case. I was told by the insurance agent, who handled “a case” that insurance companies will do everything to hold onto their money and resist payment. This means they will do everything possible to avoid parting with their money, even if it means discrediting a woman employee by suggesting that the sexual harassment complaint is merely due to a disgruntled employee or “negative personnel matter”. Rarely do sexual harassment cases go as victims intend…They have every right to stand up and fight back, but the fight is rarely without a cost.
Also I agree with Mythago…
“As Gavin de Becker put it well, a decent man doesn’t have to tell you he’s decent; he simply behaves in an appropriate manner from the moment you meet him and as long as you know him.” Great book!
It is certainly true that men are subjected to more suspicion than are women, regarding students or other subordinates with whom they work.
I don’t, however, see how those can in any way be blamed on “feminism.”
Part of it is simple reality: statistically speaking, for whatever reason (genetic or societal) men DO appear to be more likely to commit certain acts.
That said, however…. I concur with some of the other men in this thread regarding the PRACTICAL effects of the problem. Although I am personally “safe,” and would not molest or approach anyone, in my career (I’m a lawyer) I have seen a variety of unfounded accusations fly, from both sexes. And it makes me nervous.
Angry people use any weapon they have, and as I discussed above it so happens that women have better access to use of the “he harassed me” claim than do men. This is not their fault, nor does it represent a failure of feminism. Yet it is true.
I have perfect ability to predict my own likelihood to act inappropriately (zero) but have only minimal ability to predict someone’s future likelihood to react angrily, or to make inappropriate demands. How will they react if I criticize them? Fire them? Give them a bad reference?
The risk is, unfortunately, quite high. On a personal level, I would be fairly unlikely to ever agree to a situation where I did not have unusual protection against retaliation. When it comes to employment matters, i give my clients the same advice.
As a result, that makes it more difficult to offer my assistance to women, and though this is a negative effect for the women it’s not their fault at all. Nor is it the fault of feminism. But while I’m willing to make considerable sacrifices in the name of feminism, that type of exposure is not a risk I’m willing to take.
>>>There simply isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach to hugs, and there isn’t one to negotiating “safe space”. The moment we adopt a uniform standard, we risk losing relationship with one group of students or mentees whose needs are not met by that standard.<<<
You have no idea how delighted I am to hear that from an older male in this sort of context! I’ve been involved in church leadership for many years now, and, being an affectionate (female) person myself, I have trouble comprehending a ’safe place’ where people aren’t allowed to offer hugs in appropriate context… yet time and time again, I find that all the respectable adults, and this can be said twice over for the men, in youth work feel that a 100% no-contact policy is the only way to go…
You’ve also just made me realise how different I am at uni… I can’t imagine ever hugging one of my teachers.
As for Inappropriate Behavior in a teacher, what I find interesting is that no one considers the possibility of it being a problem for female academics. I know a few who, if they had been men, would be hung drawn and quartered for initiating romantic contact with a student, even after exams are in… and yet, when it’s a female teacher, the overall attitude seems to be ‘lucky student!’