Harvard University faces legal action after three women accused tenured Professor John Comaroff of sexual harassment and misconduct between 2017 and 2019. Margaret G. Czerwienski, Lilia M. Kilburn, and Amulya Mandava allege that after they reported Comaroff to Title IX, the University mishandled the situation by failing to investigate the matter for five years properly. The women have been seeking justice through the courts. Still, they also hope this case marks a turning point for Harvard, as the University can set a precedent by improving its Title IX policy and taking action against faculty who have behaved improperly.
According to the lawsuit, Comaroff allegedly subjected Lilia M. Kilburn to “a pattern of gender-based harassment and assault continuing from 2017 until at least April 2019 using threats, intimidation, and coercion.” He reportedly “threatened, intimidated, and coerced” Amulya Mandava and Margaret G. Czerwienski to tell others about the sexual misconduct.
During Harvard’s investigation of the women’s claims, 38 Harvard faculty penned and endorsed an open letter supporting Comaroff that only discussed one of the various complaints reported to Title IX as having “merit” against Comaroff. Namely, the letter mentions how Comaroff advised one of the women, Kilburn, that openly traveling as a lesbian couple could lead to sexual violence in countries where homosexuality is illegal. In the body of the letter, the writers excuse Comaroff’s comments by stating the moral obligation they, too, would feel towards any graduate student under their purview and would do the same. The letter describes Comaroff as “an excellent colleague, advisor, and committed university citizen who has trained and advised hundreds of Ph.D. students of diverse backgrounds for five decades.” It concludes with the sentence: “We are dismayed by Harvard’s sanctions against him and concerned about its effects on our ability to advise our students.”
The fact that the signed letter discusses only one of the allegations against Comaroff — the Title IX office stated (page 4, section 9) the other two lacked evidence — shows how little sexual harassment and misconduct are discussed on college campuses. The professors completely ignored the myriad of other instances where graduate students have spoken out against him at Harvard and the University of Chicago. There was a failure to mention all the times that young women spoke to other professors about the abuse they were experiencing — yet all they were told was that there was nothing for them to do. This lack of discussion leads to ignorance, possibly leaving victims without help and justice.
Later on, the professors who initially signed the letter decided to have their signatures withdrawn as they faced major backlash. They stated they did not know the full findings and evidence from the Title IX investigation and opposed their initial letter.
Professor Comaroff was investigated further for one of the three sexual harassment claims, with the other two deemed insufficient “merit” behind them. Not only was the “advice” given by Comaroff still inappropriate, as he mentioned countless times the possibility of sexual assault and murder if Kilburn was to study in Central Africa, but considering that Comaroff has had this reputation long preceding these claims, it’s perplexing that Harvard did not find the “merit” or “evidence” necessary to see the wrongdoings that had occurred. Rather than re-evaluating their Title IX department, Harvard sought to obtain Kilburn’s therapy notes, and according to the New York Times, “Harvard disseminated the records to many people involved in addressing the complaint, including several faculty members, deans, members of the Office for Gender Equity and Title IX coordinators.”
This is not the first time Harvard has failed those who have endured sexual harassment from a superior. In the early 1980s, Terry Karl — now a professor of political science at Stanford — was an assistant professor within the Government department when she reported to the University that she was experiencing sexual harassment and misconduct from then-Professor Jorge Dominguez. Dominguez, who over the last 40 years had nine other women accuse him of similar acts, was a professor of Latin American studies. Harvard failed to properly punish Dominguez until graduate students in the Government department came together and called for his removal.
It was not until 2018 when new evidence against Dominguez surfaced, the University placed him on administrative leave until his retirement in June of 2018. In an open apology, Harvard University President Larry Bacow stated that Terry Karl “deserved better, and she and others suffered greatly as a result.” He also apologized “to those whose subsequent sexual harassment might have been avoided if Harvard had taken timely and appropriate actions.”
So why has the University not yet fired a tenured professor for sexual harassment? Professor Comaroff was placed on paid leave just as Dominguez was, and Professor Gary Urton — a professor in Anthropology for 18 years, accused of sexual harassment — retired. Why won’t Harvard take a more explicit stand against sexual harassment? In Harvard’s sexual harassment procedure, it is noted that “information about the relative credibility of the parties and witnesses” is considered. This section alone disadvantages undergraduate students against reputable professors, such as the 38 who signed the letter in support of Comaroff, who can speak on behalf of a colleague they claim to know and hinder truth from reaching the light. It is beyond time to make substantive changes to Title IX procedures that will even the playing field between students and tenured, influential professors.
Georgetown has suggested reforms to all Title IX procedures, and the recommendations the University has arrived at, if implemented within our community, could help prevent assault. Georgetown’s suggestions include redefining sexual harassment from its narrow definition of being “so severe, pervasive, AND objectively offensive” to something broader and less strict. The new definition recognizes that harassment need not be reported by the victim alone but also by any bystanders who see it occur. If you see something, report it. Georgetown’s new policy recommendation also calls for an immediate investigation of any harassment claims to prevent cases from being left undealt with, including off-campus claims.
In the aftermath of the Comaroff controversy, there was another letter circulating Harvard’s campus — gaining signatures from many professors, alums, students, and faculty — condemning both Comaroff and the first letter supporting him. Additionally, Harvard students held walkouts in support of Mandava, Czerwienski, and Kilburn. The students care, the staff cares, and so do alumni. Why, then, does Harvard not award these three women justice? Is taking away tenure unimaginable when lives have been severely affected? Writing for the Center for American Progress, Jocelyn Frye has argued that to minimize sexual harassment, universities must both clearly state that anyone found guilty will be fired and have sexual harassment preventative training once a year. We cannot tolerate the excuse that a professor did not know what to do in this situation. We must actively work to prevent this from happening.
Regardless of the specifics behind the approach taken, approaches to sexual harassment prevention must be improved. There are numerous stories of professors all over the country accused of sexual misconduct, but universities rarely strip these men of tenure status. Colleges such as Stanford, the University of Virginia, and Dartmouth have dealt with these issues, but most accused receive paid leave. These professors aren’t stripped of their titles like they strip their students of a safe environment. It is vital to repudiate these individuals for their abuse of power publicly. Harvard must take away Professor Comaroff’s tenure. If Harvard, the oldest private university and one of the top universities in the world, is wary of revoking the tenured status due to inappropriate behaviors and actions, how can we, as a society, expect other institutions to do the same?
Harvard can and will set a precedent if they properly punish those who have committed acts of sexual misconduct. Yet, Professor Comaroff returned to Harvard’s campus in the fall of 2022 to teach a Harvard Law School class titled “The Anthropology of Law: Classical, Contemporary, Comparative, and Critical Perspectives.” In the spring of 2024, Comaroff will teach three courses: “Ethnography as Theory,” “The Anthropology of Law,” and Colonialism and its Postcolonial/Decolonial Afterlives: Critical Readings. Students have already taken action by organizing rallies and walkouts to protest Comaroff’s return to the classroom, but the administration has done little to demonstrate its support. Tenured professors must learn that they are not untouchable and that consequences apply to all, including themselves. For what is a world without consequences? It is one where those with less power are exploited and left to their own devices. Harvard has the power to help amplify the voices of those susceptible to manipulation and exploitation — they just need to start listening.
Image by Clay Banks is licensed under the Unsplash License.
