Making Amends and Moving Forward by Hugo Schwyzer
Since Clarisse Thorn’s interview with me appeared at Feministe about two weeks ago, there’s been a huge outpouring of shock and anger surrounding revelations about my past. I’ve only read some of the posts and the comments at various sites, but I’ve seen enough to recognize that these revelations have understandably touched a deep nerve.
Exactly a year ago, I wrote a post about the last time I used drugs and alcohol, a binge episode that ended with my attempt to kill myself and my ex-girlfriend with gas. The post was written in haste as a response to a friend’s query about forgiving oneself for a terrible error. The example my buddy Bill offered was of neglecting a dog he’d been housesitting. Foolishly, I regrettably offered the most painful example from my own life of a dreadful action – the time I tried to kill another human being and myself. It was grotesquely insensitive of me to compare what Bill had done with a pet to what I did to my ex, and I deeply regret having framed the story in that way. I also am sorry that the post was written so as to frame my feelings alone in a way that eclipsed my ex, the victim of this episode.
I do want to clarify one point from that post for the sake of the record. I never lied to the sheriff’s deputies about a suicide pact, as some bloggers have alleged. I was barely coherent when they kicked down my apartment door, and made no statement to them about what was happening, other than to ask the deputies why they were handcuffing us. After I’d been placed on a hold in a mental hospital, it was a psychiatrist who told me that the deputies had told him that this had been a suicide pact. Filled with remorse, I immediately told him the truth. He then notified the sheriff’s department. My ex and her family declined to press charges, and so no case was filed.
For many years, I’ve said that my behavior on and before June 27, 1998 was unconscionable. I was an active alcoholic and addict who caused great pain to a great many people. I was fortunate indeed never to be arrested. (Race and class privilege surely played a part in that, as I wrote in this post.) I did have consensual sexual relationships with female students in the two years prior to my last drink, something which was profoundly unethical and immoral. Even when I wasn’t high, my behavior during those years was compulsive and frequently destructive. But nothing compares to the sheer monstrousness of trying to kill another human being. The fact that I was trying to kill myself as well, and that I was high as a kite on a cocktail of street drugs, prescription pills and alcohol, does little to mitigate what I did, or my ultimate responsibility for such a horrific act.
By grace and by effort and by the help and love of a great many people, I have been sober for more than thirteen and a half years. I have been actively working a program of recovery during that time, and work one still today. Part of that recovery program has been making amends to the people whom I injured during my using years. The details of those amends are obviously private.
I also owed amends to the community I damaged through my reckless behavior. After I got sober, I sat down separately with my division dean, the college president, and the dean of human resources to tell them about my using – and about my sexual misconduct with students. Though it was terrifying to do so, I offered to resign from my teaching position. Though troubled by what I confessed, these administrators (and my colleagues, who included a number of feminist professors) felt that I could do more good by staying on. And they urged me to start finding ways to make amends.
It was the college president, Jim Kossler, who pointed out that Pasadena City College didn’t have a ban on consensual relationships between faculty and students. President Kossler suggested I chair a committee to write a policy that would outlaw the very behavior in which I had been engaged. Part of that amends, he noted, would include publicly “outing” myself as an offender. In 2000, less than two years after I got sober, I did out myself in an interview with the college paper as the president requested. The policy I helped write was finally adopted by the college Academic Senate in 2004.
But I could not as easily make amends for the attempt to take another person’s life. The hospital psychiatrist contacted the sheriff’s deputies, who declined to investigate. My ex-girlfriend and her family refused to press charges. My confession alone was not enough for an arrest, I was told. My ex-girlfriend wanted no contact with me, and I have no reason to believe that has changed; a direct amends attempt would be violating. As my sponsors told me in 1998 and continue to tell me, the best amends I can make is to live responsibly and soberly without expectation of forgiveness. That is an imperfect and incomplete solution and I understand that it doesn’t feel like enough. But it is the best one I know.
I know I’m not the man I was when I was drinking and using. But I also know I have no right to demand that others accept my transformation. I have no right to insist on being trusted. I have no right to expect forgiveness. There are places I may never be welcome as a result of my past, and I accept that. I don’t get to dictate the terms on which I’m received into any community.
This whole episode has raised questions about issues of atonement; restorative justice; privilege; the role of men in feminism. I’m willing to dialogue around those issues if a forum can be found in which that conversation can take place safely for everyone. I’m open to suggestions as to how, when, and where that dialogue can best take place. Some of the criticisms I’ve received have been valid, and I promise you, I’ve heard them.
I am interested in engaging in a productive discussion with a community that I deeply respect.
For more, see this post at No, Seriously, What About Teh Menz?; this one by Maia at Amptoons, and this one by Lisa Hickey at GMP: In Defense of Storytelling.
This article was originally posted on Hugo Schwyzer’s personal blog as “A Response.”
Hugo Schwyzer, Ph.D., is an American author, speaker and professor of history and gender studies at Pasadena City College where he developed the college’s first interdisciplinary course focusing on “Beauty and the Body.” Hugo received his bachelor’s degree from the University of California, Berkeley and holds a Ph.D. from UCLA and is co-founder of the Perfectly Unperfected Project, a body image transformation program bringing a message of hope and insight to high school students. He also serves as a director of Healthy is the New Skinny and is an adviser to Natural Models LA, a management agency. Hugo was a featured columnist as well as Sex & Gender editor for the Good Men Project Magazine. He currently writes the weekly “Genderal Interest” column at Jezebel. His articles have also appeared in the Guardian, the Los Angeles Times, the Huffington Post, Alternet,Mamamia, Modern Mom, The Frisky, and many other sites. Schwyzer co-authored Beauty, Disrupted – the autobiography of famed supermodel Carré Otis (HarperCollins, 2011).
Trackbacks
- Moving Forward: An Update | Hugo Schwyzer
- Herding Sluts: The Paternalistic Feminism of Hugo Schwyzer « Student Activism
- Feminism, Men, and Redemption | Alas, a Blog
- FEMINISM, IMPASSE AND THE REDEMPTION OF HUGO SCHWYZER « Feminism and Religion
- Men, Feminism, Race, Movements and the Cult of Hugo Schwyzer: The F Word Interview with Ernesto Aguilar | Feminist Current
Angela Yarber
Barbara Ardinger
Deanne Quarrie
Caroline Kline
Carol P. Christ
Cynthie Garrity-Bond
Elise M. Edwards
Elizabeth Cunningham
John Erickson
Marie Cartier
Feminism and Religion
Guest Contributor
Grace Yia-Hei Kao
Gina Messina-Dysert
Erin Lane
Ivy Helman
Jassy Watson
Judith Shaw
Kecia Ali
Kelly Brown Douglas
Kathryn House
Kile Jones
Karen Torjesen
Linn Marie Tonstad
Monica A Coleman
Marcia Mount Shoop
Michele Stopera Freyhauf
Oxana Poberejnaia
Rita M. Gross
Rosemary Radford Ruether
Jameelah X. Medina
Sara Frykenberg
Sarah Sentilles
Molly Remer
Xochitl Alvizo
Can you give us the gist of the faculty-student sexual relationships prohibition you wrote? I know that these relationships can be exploitative and extremely wounding. But I also know that at least up until recently most institutions of higher ed did not prohibit them if they were “consensual” rather than forced. This leaves out the big components of power over and idealization of male authority figures as “next to God.”
I cannot imagine a female professor being kept on if she had done what you say you did, it all goes to show that we still do privilege men, while reading women out of the community for similar offenses.
I want to acknowledge Hugo Schwyzer for your over 13 years of sobriety, your candor, and your willingness to to make amends. All of us have made mistakes, some big and some small, but usually, we don’t confess to them in public. By speaking honestly and making amends, you help to heal the dysfunctional system in which you participated. For me, feminism is substantially about truth-telling. I also agree with Carol P. Christ that women are more readily condemned in the patriarchal mindset and in patriarchal institutions. What would it be like to live in a world in which this was not so.
Carol and Lisa, thank you both.
Yes, male privilege (and more specifically, white male privilege) played a huge part in my ability to keep my job. I was seen as a troubled young man to be mentored and to whom should be given a second chance; someone with whom the administration had a harder time identifying around race and class and sex might not have had it so easy.
The policy made it a violation of faculty and college ethics for a faculty member (or another sort of supervisor) to engage in a consensual (as distinct from unwelcome) sexual or romantic relationship with a student currently enrolled in his or her class (or with an employee directly under their supervision.). As with many colleges, while we had a sexual harassment policy that forbade unwelcome sexual overtures, we tacitly permitted “consensual” sexual and romantic relationships. The power structures, however, make such relationships — even when, as in one instance in my past, the student is older than the professor — deeply problematic.
For men who want to be feminist allies, there is no action we can take that isn’t to some extent steeped in patriarchy. What we can do, however, is acknowledge the harm we’ve done, do what we can to mitigate that harm, and challenge others with privilege similar to our own to be accountable.
First I would like to congratulate Hugo Schwyzer on his 13 years of sobriety. Coming from a long line of addicts/alcoholics, (even ended up marrying a man who “became” an addict) I understand the disease and the unmeasurable toll it takes on the addict/alcoholic, but also on the other side, the often silenced voices of family, friends, and those affected by the behavior of the addict/alcoholic.
While not in all cases, to be on the receiving end of an amends can feel uncomfortable and even artificial. It can feel as though the addict/alcoholic is again setting the agenda, i.e. when, where, how, etc. with the recipient. Depending on the relationship, the amends can naively be seen as the capstone of recovery for both parties, but it is not the ending but instead the beginning of redemption and healing for all involved. It is not an event, but the long and at times painful dual process of self-forgiveness by the addict/alcoholic and the willingness of those affected by their behavior to integrate the challenging process of reconciliation. The wounds of the recipient can be overshadowed by the sheer drama of the addict/alcoholic’s recovery from death to new life, their voice and struggles with forgiveness muted and set aside in light of the miracle of transformation of the addict/alcoholic.
While Schwyzer is correct when he asserts the role of male-priviledge, I do not want to loose sight of the bigger picture that is at play in the narrative of Schwyzer’s recovery through sobriety. To become entangled in the what-ifs of gender consequences is to diminish the reality of the power of forgiveness to bring life and vitality to all parties concerned. What, I might ask, is the alternative? The ability of Schwyzer as male to self-critique male privilege and then do something about it through public acknowledgment and writing, will serve as a catalyst for awareness and change in ways that I as a female may not be able to enact.
My self-identification as a feminist must move me in the direction of seeking wholeness for women and men, which may include the process of forgiveness and reconciliation to an agent that is responsible for inflicting injustice because of male privilege. Additionally, forgiveness does not imply forgetting without the heavy lifting of restoration of those harmed.
If it is true that we are in fact interconnected, then the well-being and recovery of Hugo Schwyzer must also benefit me and in-turn the greater project of feminism.
Thank you Hugo for your contribution here. It’s hard to know how to respond to the content as there are so many possible ways and so many different emotions and concerns that your post raises for me. I’ll offer two of my thoughts. First I am struck by how qualitatively different (and difficult) it is to respond/react to your story (past) of abuse and attempted murder/suicide when read in a public forum like this blog, one that has feminism at its center, than if you were my friend, someone I personally knew, and you were telling me this story in person. In a public forum that has feminist community and dialogue as part of its central aim, what and how a man contributes to the blog has so many more implications, as does how any of us responds – I just thought that was worth expressing.
My second thought is that your life as a whole, or more accurately, the whole of who you are today – all that you do, what you contribute to, how you live your life in relationship with others, the projects you take on, the work and writing you do, and the internal motivation that drives them all (even if unknown to others) – is what constitutes amending actions. These can’t be done for the sake of a particular result, as a means to some end, even living in a feminist way. But must be done because one believes them to be worthwhile in and of themselves. And so, my hope is that your desire to participate in discussion and dialogue is not for the sake of validation or affirmation from a feminist community, but out of sincere and genuine desire to participate in feminist community (however we might each define that) for the sake of a transformed world (or at least a transformed self).
This blog is a place where together we can discuss, challenge, and rethink the variety of questions raised by your experience. And it is by how each of us participates that we contribute toward making such a discussion safe or not. I know many of us are already committed to making this as safe and as open as possible – as much as that can be done – and to have other such partners is always welcome.
Hugo, I want to thank you for cross-posting your article on FAR. I know there has been quite a bit of controversy around your past; however your 13 years of sobriety and focus on making amends, moving forward, and working towards a feminist initiative is quite admirable. If we all admitted our errors and then worked to correct them – what a great world we would live in, no?
I am teaching a feminist theology course this semester and it is our first week of class. We are discussing what exactly feminism is and who identifies as feminist. We discussed your post today and my students had some very insightful thoughts. In particular, one woman asked, “what is considered feminist if not acknowledging the patriarchal system you participated in and trying to correct it?” (I’m paraphrasing of course).
I also want to state that I Carol made an important point, as did Hugo, white male privilege certainly influenced your ability to keep your job – but also, not be prosecuted. Had a woman, or a non-white male committed such an act, he or she would have certainly been prosecuted. Working with rape and domestic violence survivors, I had repeatedly seen non-white men prosecuted for offenses when their partners refused to press charges and the opposite treatment for white men.
Again, Hugo thank you for having the courage to share and for doing what so many have not been able to do. Making amends is not easy – I have no doubt the work you have done in the last thirteen years has made a major impact in the feminist movement.
We cross-posted, Gina. Thanks for passing on your students’ comments too!
Thank you, Cynthie and Xochitl. I wrote this piece originally for my own blog, in frank doubt that a place for a serious discussion about the questions this story and my role in feminism raise could be found. I’m heartened that Gina offered this space.
And of course, I’m keenly aware that the person whom I wrote about in the original story is not here and not heard. I’m not able to make amends directly to her as any such overture would be understandably unwelcome. I realized too late that a hastily written post at my own blog may have served to reopen old wounds (if by some chance she were to hear of it or have it pointed out.) I don’t want to keep compounding old injuries in my own narrative, least of all in feminist spaces.
As Xochitl says, this isn’t about validation and forgiveness for me as much as it is a belief that this work matters. And I want to use what privilege I have, just as I want to use what woundedness and frailty I have, to use whatever I’ve got to try to reach men in particular. Not with a simple prodigal redemption story, but — I hope — a chance to talk about the ways in which we let go of the sexism, the abusiveness, the rage. A way forward to letting go of the privileges we don’t even recognize.
Thanks for this discussion.
Dear Hugo,
I also thank you for your honesty and the risk you take posting your story. I think the project you describe above in your replies is very important as well– the work does matter.
I also appreciate your reference to restorative justice, which is a concept that I think has so much potential for counter-abusive movement in our society.
On a more personal note, I guess I wanted to say, that you’re post tapped into a part of me that I do not often share. I suppose it has made me want to share that experience– I hope that is alright.
My life was never in danger, but I was once sort of “trapped” with someone who wanted to kill himself. He also abused drugs, though it was sometimes difficult to tell when he was using because he also suffers from what we think is a bi-polar or manic disorder.
Recently– this week actually, I re-read a reflection I wrote about my experience with him during this time. I wrote that I’d never felt so controlled. I couldn’t leave him, for fear of what would happen. I couldn’t just yell and tell someone, again, for fear of what would happen. I did, however, manage in the end to contact the police via a friend. They then intercepted us and took this man to a detainment facility for observation. Remembering this (I was much younger), I don’t know if he was going to go through with the suicide; but I know that I felt he was entirely serious at the time.
I know this does not compare to your experience or that of your ex, but I wanted to share it because of the way, in your above comment, you connect your experience to abuse and rage. The control I felt was definitely a part of the abuse this man had perpetuated on me for years. The control I felt, 7 month’s earlier, when my ex boyfriend emailed me to let me know that I’d made him lose his faith in God and he didn’t want to live anymore, was also a part of an abusive relationship. I think the idea you talk about, about using everything you have, good and bad, towards the end of combating abuse or reaching men, is so important. We cannot simply deny our relationship to abuse if we want to change it– we have to live, countering it every day.
I just wanted to say, howbeit, in a different way, I too have to counter-abuse every day. I sometimes have to consciously resist the draw towards this paradigm, its terrible trap and confusing lies. — and while I live with this, it is my hope, that I can teach my children (when or if I have them) something different– that my resistance and conscious counter-abusive movements will help them to choose differently. So, thank you again for sharing and continuing to choose differently.
Responding to your post and to Gina’s comment, and taking into accouint my having watched many episoes of Law and Order, I do not understand how the police could not have prosecuted you for attempted murder or at least negotiated a plea, as attempted murder is a charge that is more serious than domestic violence, and one that does not require an accuser, but only a crime. This sounds like a violaton of the principles of criminial justice on the face of it to me. I am not asking you to revisit the details of the crime or the psychologies of pollice investigators, prosecutors, or potential juries involved with your case.. But I would encourage you and others who have been given a “get out of jail free” pass by the system to work in some way with the criminal justice system to assure that while educated males are prosecuted for crimes against women in the future because this also is part of the legacy of your story..As Gina says the criminal justice system as a whole including juries still tends to have more sympathy with white male perpetrators of violence against women than it does with female victims of violence.
I think that’s right, Carol.
So much of what happened in the days after the suicide/murder attempt is blurry to me. But I do remember that everyone seemed to think that the criminality of my act was mitigated by my own self-destructiveness and by how whoppingly intoxicated I was. The fact that I had no criminal record, that I was white and male and a college professor obviously played a part. My ex-girlfriend and her family were very wealthy and well-connected, and they were adamant about not pressing charges. It’s likely that their decision was what determined that I wouldn’t face charges.
And the building manager of the apartment building I could have blown up happened to be a friend, the other tenants were sympathetic rather than irate… it was a hugely lucky thing for me, a luck abetted by privilege.
All that said, yes, I do agree I have a specific obligation to work for accountability among those who are most likely not to have to face justice. I’ve worked with groups like Men Can Stop Rape and other violence prevention organizations since getting clean and sober. More aggressive prosecution is part of the answer. But the real answer is ending the cycle of violence. For me, what I did was inextricably bound up with an addiction to substances. And working to get addicts into programs that can help them achieve sobriety and begin the recovery and amends process is something I’ve done ever since 1998. I’m not done yet and won’t be done anytime I can imagine.
And I should say I welcome more concrete suggestions as well on how to continue the restorative justice process in this instance.
Dr. Christ, based on my experience of prison work (8 years in prison literacy, in both Canada and the United States) I would say that the privileges accorded an educated and articulated man identified as “white” persist into prison and throughout the “prison industrial complex” as well. I could write at length on the issues with prisons as a response to violent behaviour, and I probably should, but suffice it to say that in my opinion numerous problems weigh against the idea that putting more men identified as straight white and cis-genered into jail will achieve justice.
This was thoughtfully written and read–and I appreciate your candor.
I’d like to comment on this part however–no one’s mentioned it:
“The post was written in haste as a response to a friend’s query about forgiving oneself for a terrible error. The example my buddy Bill offered was of neglecting a dog he’d been housesitting. Foolishly, I regrettably offered the most painful example from my own life of a dreadful action –”
When I first read that someone had *neglected a dog* that he’d been housesitting; I was horrified–what kind of person when entrusted with an innocent animal–does that…? The pet owner who trusted him is let down, plus an innocent animal who doesn’t know any better and doesn’t have any options.
In any case, I was clearly affected by that thought as I read. And for my money–your share with Bill–was not ‘foolish’. Although the two stories and circumstances differ–your intent was to assuage and that’s that.
While your story might have been TMI for many–I’m still troubled by the thought of someone neglecting a dog in their care. As a pet owner who travels; I bet I’m not the only one.
Several people have pointed out the same thing, and I am sorry if in the response I wrote it seemed as if I were trivializing harm (or in this instance, potential harm) to a beloved pet.
Thank you, Hugo, for this followup to your troubling earlier post. As someone who is living with the grave personal and professional effects of clergy/professorial abuse by my undergraduate mentor after many years of courageous healing work, I would like to point out another arena for your amends process for your abuse of your students: improving the gravely flawed sexual misconduct policy that only prohibits non-unwelcome/implicitly pressured sexual contact with students presently in one’s course or under one’s supervision as employees. (The description of such contact as “consensual” is highly offensive, as it completely undermines the gravity of the violation and the massive power imbalance which makes free consent to sexual contact impossible and any such contact abusive on the part of the professor). It should forbid all sexual contact between professors and, at a minimum, undergraduate students (the entire population of PCC) while the latter are enrolled in the college at which the professor teaches. This is analogous to the fact therapists and pastors are not free to justify sexual misconduct with those in their professional care by pressuring their clients or congregants to leave therapy or a worshipping community so as to become supposed free agents available for a sexual relationship. The ethical requirement of a decent interval between terminating such a professional relationship and beginning a romantic one is meant to head off such convoluted justifications for exploitation of the vulnerable.
My professor began grooming me for abuse during my sophomore year, while I was in his seminars winter and spring quarter, but began the actual physical abuse during the summer term when I was not in a course taught by him. He continued it episodically throughout my junior year, during which I was not in a course fall and winter quarters and was spring quarter. Obviously, the power imbalance which made the contact abusive continued whether I was presently in a course or not, though presently being enrolled in a course magnified it because of the grading issue. And this is not just true because, as an aspirant for a doctoral program and his advisee, I was dependent upon his recommendation for my future–this just magnified the power imbalance in my case which existed with every other student on that campus.
You say, I believe sincerely, that this experience has increased your desire to deepen your amends process without harm to others, I believe sincerely, and I beg you to take the opportunity to do so by working to fix that policy, to speak out about its deficiencies, and to cease the minimizing and traumatizing-to-survivors use of “consensual” in regard to such actions by you and others. Prayers and thanks.
It’s a great point, RevDrLaura. Are professors really analogous to pastors and therapists, who should be enjoined with a lifetime ban on relationships with former students? We’re not regulated as professional associations in the same way, so the enforcement would be hugely challenging. I think the policy certainly could be expanded.
The word consensual is, of course, designed to distinguish these relationships from sexual harassment, which in federal law is defined as “unwelcome.” But I’ll be the first to admit it’s much more complex than that.
As a longtime feminist, and one in recovery for some years now, I deeply appreciate this post. What concerns me are many of the comments. This post is not about who is the most oppressed in our communities. As a queer woman of color these issues are near and dear to me yet I am so tired of hearing about the big bad straight white male. I find it interesting that not one white female concerned herself with what would have happened if Hugo were a woman of color or gay. Not all women are the same and power is not top down. I have experienced as much sexism and racism by white women as anyone else, perhaps more considering my academic environment. I do not see my fellow men as “allies”, I see them as feminists and I often find solace with men of color and gay men rather than fellow women.
This is not to argue that these concerns should not be raised but it is troubling when it seems that after this post that is where the conversation goes. Making amends, at the end of the day, is for yourself. The addict can only feel “indebted” for so long. What we have to do is try and live each day to the best of our abilities. Clearly there is a process, yet both the addict and the one wounded must be a part of it. If the wounded party wants no part of your amend, you must move on. You have done your part. It is time for the addict/alcoholic to continue on their path of redemption and change. Addiction is a community, familial, and individual disease and to lay it solely on the addict is not feminist in my opinion.
Addiction is in dire need of feminism and feminism can greatly benefit from the principles of recovery. The personal is political and storytelling and bearing witness are avenues of power for transformative change. Nothing is perfect but it seems critique is our main source of engagement with other’s writings. Critique is essential but not without solution. At this point in my career, criticism for the sake of criticism is a mind-numbing hamster wheel. Where do we go from here? How can we rehabilitate? How do we bring Persephone back from Hades or understand the prodigal son? Community, forgiveness and redemption are not static entities, but continually shifting movements that need people that can, and want, to be a part of something that will break but can be remolded. If we all lived each day as a living amends, perhaps more cracks would be made for that is how the light gets through.
Lindsey, I loved this “feminism can greatly benefit from the principles of recovery.” I, speaking only for myself, heartily concur.
PS: A additional fine point analogous to the therapist/pastor relationship-ending/decent interval issue: imagine a professor who begins having sex with a student while s/he is not in a course. Under the present policy, the professor will almost certainly encourage the student to not take his/her classes in future terms, which could harm the student academically and professionally as well as personally if such classes were the only, or best, option for the student.
I’ve read lots of the hoopla and comments surrounding this situation, and I still see nothing wrong with your writing and sharing the article about what happened with you and your ex while you were so thoroughly out of your mind intoxicated. You’re a writer, Hugo, an artist. As writers and artists, we use our own pain and experiences and transformation as art, we use it to help others. We shouldn’t be punished for that. And it’s not like it happened yesterday and you’re not horribly sorry and sick about it. PEOPLE CHANGE. People make amends. People grow…. dude, people need to CHILL OUT.
Many of your courageous posts, and unequivocally that one in particular, have helped me tremendously.
Thank you, Holly!
I’ve been reading Hugo’s work for a while — I like most of the theoretical stuff, and have not much cared for the personal storytelling — and since this has been coming across my RSS feed, I’ve noticed one thing that I think is critical to the discussion. Hugo — you refer to this mostly as “controversy over [your] past,” or questions about your pre-sobriety days, or variations on that. I think that mischaracterizes a lot of what people are upset about, and — whether that’s your intention or not — it makes this a very hard conversation for people to have.
To put it plainly, this doesn’t seem to be mostly about Hugo’s actions a decade ago, before he got sober — at least not what I’m reading (and what I’m thinking personally). This isn’t something that people dug up and are using to prove that you’re an illegitimate feminist, or some scandal come back to haunt you. People are upset about this because you put it out there, and the way that you write about it (how hot the sex was, how the murder attempt was done out of a misguided sense of mercy) suggests that you are not approaching this with a perspective that makes it seem like a thing that happened in the distant past, to a person who had not yet transformed his life. It’s not about something horrible you did ten years ago, it’s about the fact that what we’re seeing now — even in response to people offering criticism — is not anything that inspires confidence.
In short, the whole picture of Hugo Schwyzer we get from the stories of the past, from the oversharing of information that may not have been yours to share, from the the actual incidents that you describe, from the way that you’re characterizing this criticism in ways that aren’t always accurate, and the fact that, even in a blog post you made this weekend where you talk about the need to listen more, you spend fifteen paragraphs writing about yourself — those add up to a picture of someone who does not seem to be a good candidate for a leadership role in a social justice movement. And because criticism of that nature — of which there has been a lot — seems to have been either ignored or mischaracterized, it’s a challenge not to also doubt your willingness to discuss this in good faith.
In any case, making big, public announcements about the things you’ve stepped down and/or been removed from, debating whether or not to continue writing for Jezebel, talking about no longer teaching the courses you teach at some point in the future — I don’t think that is what the situation calls for. What it calls for, probably more than anything, is for you to step way back from this, not post anything centered around yourself (or maybe anything at all) for a while, listen to your critics without talking about how you’re listening, and get some perspective. After a few weeks, or months — however long it takes to overcome the need to respond to everyone all the time, in ways that frame their arguments as things you have ready responses for — then it is probably healthy to engage again.
Some people won’t want you back in any case, and that, as you know, is their right. But right now, you are reacting to all of this in a way that suggests you don’t fully understand what people are criticizing you for, and that can only be solved by adding a lot of perspective.
Good luck.
–d
Dan, I think my post this past weekend needed to be about where I was in the process; I’m besieged with requests to clarify my position and I have public obligations that can’t be put off for weeks and months. Indeed, the bulk of the criticism is that I’ve said too little, not too much, about this controversy. If I remain quiet, I’m accused of allowing my defenders to do the hard work for me; if I speak up, I’m accused of self-aggrandizement. Do you see that that’s a no-win?
Amongst the various criticisms that I’ve heard, I’d like to suggest several things, most of which I’ve written to you in the past privately about (and been told by you that my perspective was largely either “wrong” or similar) – totally excluding the direct issues of your past behavior and similar. I’m not sure it’s worth repeating these things, because it seems that they aren’t really relevant to how You see things but:
1. As a man – concerned about Feminist Issues – which you obviously are, a Significant amount of your focus should in my estimation be upon – working Primarily with Men in two related ways:
a. Working on your Own Issues – in Private with Other Men – in a similar way to how you I believe have worked on your Sobriety Issues with others – who are in recovery – though our men’s issues for most of us will continue for the rest of our lives (as recovery may be),
b. Working as a “helper” – with Men – or at a minimum Largely with Men – Not – leaving the(work to reach men to largely be an adjunct portion of your focus ) – focusing your work upon Men – not Women,
2. Work Related to Women – oft times belongs amongst Women – While you can certainly teach women – as you do – being an Ally of Women – particularly related to 1. above – oft times belongs in my estimation on the sidelines. Slut Walks, for example- gave you an opportunity – to reach out to Male Allies of The Women – in a way similar to how other men in the past have used Take Back the Night Marches as a chance to gather Men to work both in support of the Women and to deal with their Own Men’s Issues. Instead – You seem to Have a HUGE need to become “The Leader” – such as THE Voice of the Slut Walk in LA.
3. Related to 2. above – Getting Attention – is NOT the value – though oft times it seems a large value for you. It isn’t important that you get recognized and in the spotlight. It is important that you do Good Work – and feel good about your work because of What you have done, not because of the focus upon you it brings.
4. (I can’t speak significantly to this area, but) There are substantive criticisms of both your general feminist approach including significant things related to Women of Color. Hearing such criticisms and figuring out how to best make yourself at least “better” in those areas seems important.
It is, of course, far, far easier to – live as you have receiving continuing accolades from young women – who you may well be helping, rather than doing the tough, but critically important job of working primarily with men – who strangely enough – really need a lot of work on the issues. Working with men and working on your own issues in a really, really serious way won’t get similar publicity. It’s your choice! (I, as a man, have made my own similar choices in these areas.) Good Luck!
Geo, we’ve been over this before. Thank you for this, though, as I agree that my future work will likely include additional work with men.
But you know, I do a great deal of work that I don’t write about on the blog. The camera caught me at SlutWalk LA. But far more often, I am quietly and anonymously putting in time behind the scenes. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, you know? I don’t blog the sum total of my activism or of my private life. Much of what you ask me to do I am already doing. And if I write about doing it as evidence, then again, that will be self-aggrandizing; if I don’t write about it, then it’s assumed I’m not doing it.
I’m a man, and your story has touched me. In an attempt to be constructive, I say: stop trying to be a public feminist. Stop trying to teach feminism. Withdraw.
Hugo, I appreciate your attempts at responding to my concerns but ask you to reread them more carefully and take them more seriously, in action as well as words.
Therapists and pastors are not forbidden from sexual contact with former clients and congregants for the rest of their lives. The ethical prohibition lasts only while such people are under their professional care and thus at a massive power disadvantage that makes any claimed consent non-free, and for a decent interval after ceasing such care to ensure that they will not harm people even more deeply by ending such professional care in order to make them fair game for sexual exploitation.
Analogously, I did not suggest a lifetime ban on sexual contact with former students, just a ban on sexual contact with students who are presently enrolled in the university where you teach and thus under the same massive power imbalance. One of my most beloved grad school profs did the right thing by waiting 2 full years for one of her male undergraduate students to graduate before beginning their dating/romantic relationship, which eventually led to marriage. This is even more necessary in a community college setting where the students are not just all undergraduates, but all lower division undergraduates, and in many cases have an additional power imbalance between the professors who are supposed to serve them, not exploit them, due to race and class issues. The policy prohibiting sex only with students currently in one’s class is gravely flawed; it not only “could be changed” but must be changed, with serious education on the issues for students as well as faculty, for their full protection, and this would be quite easy for the school to enforce if they cared to.
You were one of the main architects of the policy that still permits serious damage to students, and claim that enacting it was part of making amends for your previous abuse of students. As others have pointed out, your resignation should have been accepted and would have been if you had been female, of color, or, likely, a gay man preying on men instead of women. Since it wasn’t, if you actually regret your behavior and wish to make full amends you should make a major priority of 1) seriously listening to survivors of similar abuse when they speak their truth to your power, not blowing them off. “Consensual” is not “complex”–it is absolutely untrue and retraumatizing and shows that you still do not get it. I was actually far more damaged with false shame by both the professor–and the university which winked at his behavior, like PCC–than if he had violently raped me or proposed an A for a lay. This is especially true because he was married and so I thought I was a slut and adulteress for years until a trustworthy adult explained the power dynamics and abusive nature of his behavior). 2) educating yourself on the issues involved: you absolutely need to read *Sex in the Forbidden Zone: When Therapists, Doctors, Clergy, Teachers and Other Men in Power Betray Women’s Trust* by Peter Rutter and preferably all of Marie Fortune’s work on sexual exploitation by pastors as well 3) taking concerted action to improve the policy until it fully protects students, even if this takes time from more enjoyable and publicly rewarding activities like blogging. If you are not willing to take these simple steps for justice and dignity for your students you should blush to claim being a feminist ally, much less a feminist.
Fair enough. I’ll ask for a reconvening of an academic senate committee, and ask for the policy to be revisited. It will have to be done in a way that is compatible with state law and the Ed Code, but I’m hoping that a similar code already exists at a public college in California. It will be easier if we have in-state precedent. But not impossible if we don’t.
One note: spouses of faculty often take enrichment courses on campus. Many are in their 40s and 50s. An exemption of some sort will need to be devised.
I’ve read quite a bit of Fortune but haven’t read Rutter. I appreciate the suggestion and will look for it before the new term begins on February 22.
Thank you!
You’re welcome, Hugo, and thank you for promising to do the right thing. Please do make it a priority to follow through, and keep us informed of your progress.
More comprehensive policies are becoming more and more common, so hopefully other CA public schools have set an example which will be easy to follow (including the obvious exemption for someone already in a marriage/committed same sex partnership to continue sexual contact with their partner). If not, PCC can and should set the example for them.
If you’d like to see an example, though at a CA private school, I believe Santa Clara University, where I was abused, has finally changed its policy to prohibit all sexual contact between faculty and students, with the key point that claims of consensuality constitute no defense due to the power imbalance.
I will keep you posted and will report on this. I’ll check out the Santa Clara policy; I know a lot has changed in the decade or so since we wrote ours. And with that exemption in place, I see no reason why this policy couldn’t go forward and make a more complete statement than what we’ve had.
Our first faculty senate meeting is February 29 (or March 7, I have to check) and I’ll raise it at that time and see if we can begin a faculty-initiated process.
Thanks for the encouragement and the wise insistence that this is not something to shy away from doing.
I find the comments and reactions urging Professor Schwyzer to simply ‘withdraw’ from the spotlight very odd (though there were only one or two such comments above, I have seen them elsewhere too). It’s far easier said than done, especially for someone with a public persona. The fact that some of these comments are framed as ‘constructive’ criticism or advice from other men is even more problematic to me—it doesn’t feel right. I suspect that such people are not actually as concerned about this man’s psychological well being as they claim — withdrawing from the spotlight I think would create more problems than answers. I have a hard time believing that people can’t foresee that in this age of media hype, spin and spectacle.
Personally, I have to thank you Professor Schwyzer—as a transgender person (born female, identify as male) who has strong feminist ethics, I really struggle with reconciling my (male) gender identity with the fact that I don’t hear male voices who hold themselves to such a level of accountability and transparency as you currently do and make their own struggles so public. Honestly, these things need to be talked about—how many men out there who have committed similar transgressions as you have *don’t* talk about it (much less in a public space), and don’t make amends, and don’t reflect? Too darn many. However triggering your writings about your past may be (and I’ve noticed many such posts do have trigger warnings), the point for me is, wow, someone is actually talking about this process of recovery from pathological or misogynist behavior, and exhibiting humility. As you have undoubtedly discovered, the ramifications of that are pretty much being accused of being a hypocrite. But it’s a small price to pay for the good you are doing by simply being “an open book” as you say. As a relative newcomer to your work and all the recent debate, perhaps my perspective is naive, but I really want to thank you for your courage.
That’s very kind, thank you!
So Sinopoulos: Withdrawal is not simple and it is not easy. But it is the right thing. I suspect Hugo knows this. I also sympathize with his struggle. You are free to doubt that sympathy.
Well, I guess I just don’t agree that withdrawal is the right thing. I feel that right and wrong cannot be that binary, involving either withdrawal or not. Indeed, I don’t doubt your sympathy, and didn’t mean to personally question you. But I don’t know if I can say the same for the general cohort asking Mr. Schwyzer to retreat away from the public eye…
Let’s try this again, shall we?
Hugo. Have you re-read your old post to Kyle Payne?
Cara, I have, and the situations simply aren’t analogous. Kyle Payne was a sexual predator who was convicted of attacking a woman, and was later convicted for child pornography possession. I fail to see the similarity.
Hugo, you have admitted to attempted murder of a woman, which should have led to your imprisonment, and the sexual abuse of two vulnerable young women in your professional care, which should have led to your loss of employment. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the insidious power abuse of my own undergraduate adviser, while sparing me the physical pain of a violent rape, caused much more severe emotional trauma through false guilt and shame. So the only significant difference I see is in your privilege-assisted ability to avoid the consequences of your behavior, and the self-deception that keeps you from seeing the very strong similarities in your choices.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the child pornography conviction came about after you wrote that letter. At the time, all that was known about Kyle Payne’s misdeeds was that he preyed upon a woman who had trusted him. I could name the ways in which that conduct is dissimilar to your long dark night, but the comparison would not flatter you, and the problem posed by your presence has never been about one singular act.
Hugo, you have described in loving details how you prey upon women. It’s disingenuous for you to deny that you are a predator now. You might not ever have seen yourself as one, but I suspect that few people who prey on the weak see themselves as predators, or even as opportunists. They simply don’t see anything wrong with what they’re doing at the time they do it. And while it’s possible for a person to grow and change, if you aren’t able to name what you were doing then it is not possible for you to have outgrown it.
Hugo, you’ve admitted to trying to kill a woman who had put herself into your power. You’ve admitted to taking sexual advantage of women across a power divide. You’ve admitted to having sex with a woman who was giving “obvious signals” that she didn’t want to. The nicest thing that can be said about this conduct is that, no, it’s not child pornography, but I think you need something more than “I fail to see the similarity” if you would dispute the characterization of these actions as sexually preying upon woman.
No, you were never convicted of anything, but “I am not guilty of anything in the eyes of the law.” would be a strange stance for someone who is supposedly on taking responsibility for his past actions to take, would it not? “Never convicted!” is a sleazy career politician’s retort to allegations, not a reformed sinner’s way of coming to grips with his past.
And yet I find it to be consistent with the manner in which you write about your past misdeeds, both pre and post sobriety. Your writing fits a standard narrative of confession and contrition but the horror of what you’ve done always relates to the consequences you could have faced more than your actual actions themselves.
You say things like “no one needs to accept that I’ve changed”, but when people don’t, you mock them on your Facebook and turn your followers loose on them. That suggests to me that you do not believe the words you wrote but just wrote them as a matter of form. And because it is part of the unspoken social contract of forgiveness, the fact that you wrote that nobody needs to forgive you will convince a fair number of people of your sincerity… and also convince them that anyone who dares dispute your redemption is automatically hateful and arguing in bad faith.
Sometimes I wonder if you are cynically manipulating people using this narrative of redemption that’s reinforced both by religion and the self-help culture, and sometimes I wonder if you’ve been fooled by it yourself. But at the end of the day I care less about what’s going on in your head, your heart, or your soul and more about what you do with the platforms that are afforded you.
Payne was convicted of partially disrobing a sleeping woman and groping and photographing her breasts. You tried to kill your girlfriend.
These were both “attacks,” Hugo, and if there’s any dissimilarity between the two crimes, it doesn’t work in your favor.
Frankly, my point was more about your advice to him–that when the irony surrounding the behavior of a “feminist activist” makes a mockery of said “activist’s” purported feminism (that is, the deep-down belief that ‘women are people’ as opposed to objects or props for use in his own personal drama), then the best thing said “activist” could do for feminism is to quit whining about how mean the women are for being upset, step away from the soapbox, and really, genuinely, PRIVATELY, QUIETLY, examine his soul and repent.
I think a major difference here, Cara (and others), is the timeline. We are seeing the reactions now that people are having to only just discovering Hugo’s actions of over a decade ago, written openly about a year ago and hinted at fairly strongly in various writings for years.
Kyle’s situation unfolded in real time as it happened, now less than three years ago.
If this were 10+ years ago, I think the comparison might be fair.
Hugo has demonstrated years of both quiet and public activism on behalf of women, feminism and gender issues after all this occurred. It’s the rest of us who are playing catch-up. It was out of what appears to me to be a genuine desire to live his beliefs as well as make amends that he has taken the course he has.
Many doubt that sincerity, of course. I initially went through a period of doubting him. But I have asked myself and put it out there…to what end? Why would someone with the admitted privilege, charisma, speaking and writing ability that Hugo has demonstrated put himself in the obvious position of being called out. With all the ways that someone could “advance” themselves in a career with those qualities, why choose one that, frankly, doesn’t have a huge payoff? And if there are any feminist bloggers here that have made a mint, much less a living, from doing so, please correct me.
People do social justice, including feminism, because they BELIEVE in those principles or, at minimum, believe in discovering themselves through those principles.
Many have spoken to his supposed narcissism (and I write that knowing that Hugo has mentioned it himself). While I am qualified to diagnose personality disorders, I wouldn’t dare to without interviews, observations and a lot more information that I gather when actually treating someone.
BUT, let’s go with that, and say that Hugo IS narcissistic. His actions, in the realm that he has chosen, are not consistent with that diagnosis. A narcissist seeks to put themselves in situations where they can gain the most acclaim/notice/focus possible, and overwhelmingly positive. True narcissists DO wish to be leaders or recognized positively for their contributions. They generally don’t wish to be hated/scorned/despised.
He would likely have done far better to rise up in the field of History, not gender issues.
I tend to review a lot of information before making a decision. I’ve read nearly all the comments over these past weeks. And this just doesn’t add up the way many of his critics are stating.
What makes the most sense is that he is a human struggling to address a life he used to live from the standpoint of where he is now.
Amen… well spoken Andrew. Your perspective is valuable!
Mostly public. Not at all quiet from my own observation. I don’t call teaching feminist theory (especially at the same college where you’ve exploited students previously) being quietly contemplative.
Why would someone with the admitted privilege, charisma, speaking and writing ability that Hugo has demonstrated put himself in the obvious position of being called out. With all the ways that someone could “advance” themselves in a career with those qualities, why choose one that, frankly, doesn’t have a huge payoff?
But it does have a huge payoff for someone like that. It’s one we normal people don’t really understand because we don’t think in those terms. The payoff is attention. The payoff is knowing that no matter what awful things you’ve done someone will think of you as a trashy romance novel hero and defend you.
The payoff is knowing that no matter what awful things you’ve done someone will think of you as a trashy romance novel hero and defend you.
Mmm, perhaps that could have some appeal to someone, but it wouldn’t meet the definition of narcissism which is what most of the critics are attempting to establish as a foundation for his behavior and writings.
It’s been amply demonstrated that people pretend to be allies so they can more easily exploit the vulnerable. Just ask Kyle Payne.
I agree with you that there are people who do this, but, again, in this specific case, the comparison doesn’t work. Kyle had a couple years of building a rep and THEN committed the acts he did, “did his time” and THEN committed more acts.
Hugo’s acts were both prior to and very early in his “gender issues” career, which he addressed personally and in ways many in our culture continue to look upon with disdain (I’m referring to 12 Step programs), so those people discount his reporting of change and growth. He then went on to write, speak and build the base he now has. I say again, that it is we who are playing catch-up and now scrutinizing everything he has done SINCE those acts through the lens OF those acts.
And, honestly, I come away from most of the critics hearing that they just didn’t like his feminist stance, philosophy and writing style to begin with. I respect that. Not to say that there aren’t some legitimate challenges and questions that Hugo needs to consider.
But I do ask the critics to examine the wide wide world of feminist/gender writing and acknowledge that there are ongoing writers espousing versions of feminism that I think, side by side, they would agree are far more “toxic” than anything Hugo has ever written.
That isn’t a “he’s not as bad, so you should like him” argument. It’s a “clearly there is room for a wide range of divergent opinions within feminism” argument. I don’t see organized campaigns looking to sideline those voices.
So, read who fits and/or challenges your views in the way you like.
One more thing and I’ll shut up.
People do social justice, including feminism, because they BELIEVE in those principles or, at minimum, believe in discovering themselves through those principles.
It’s been amply demonstrated that people pretend to be allies so they can more easily exploit the vulnerable. Just ask Kyle Payne.
I mean, people CAN also pretend to be allies. Or think they’re allies because they’re only glossing the surface. Kyle Payne was an “ally” just long enough to decide he’d earned enough Feminism Points that he could redeem them by copping a feel of an unconscious girl. Not just COULD redeem them, but, indeed, DESERVED to. Because why else would someone exploit another like that? There’s an element of entitlement there, as there is in Hugo’s case.
NOW I’m done.
As of this Tuesday January 24, I am legally enjoined from commenting publicly about many of the issues raised in this post, including my past. Please know that I have found this conversation productive and am grateful to Feminism and Religion for making this space available for this discussion to take place.