Re-storying the problem: sexually transgressive behavior in academia
Increasingly, sexual harassment in academia is identified as a problem. In this article, we take issue with its framing as a problem that must be solved through a juridical procedure. We argue that an overemphasis on this juridical perspective allows academic institutions to obscure and evade their moral and epistemic responsibilities toward their members. Before the question of retribution can be addressed, it is important to strive for an accurate representation of the problem at hand. In this regard, not just the judiciary’s perspective must be considered, but also that of victim-survivors, bystanders, perpetrators, and those working to end sexual harassment.
Drawing upon Dotson’s three-order framework of epistemic injustice, we argue that institutional responses to sexual harassment routinely exclude survivor experiences, thus perpetuating epistemic oppression. Our philosophical analysis points to the importance of storytelling: it matters pistemically who gets to tell their story, and which stories receive institutional uptake. We especially stress the harms that arise when victim-survivors’ accounts are non-paradigmatic: that is, they deviate from the standard story of sexual harassment within academia. To counteract this standard story and to supplement the juridical approach, we argue for the epistemic importance of telling, and hearing, stories that convey non-paradigmatic experiences of sexual harassment from the survivor’s perspective. These narratives provide invaluable tools in rectifying the three forms of epistemic injustice perpetuated by processes of institutional silencing. This article endeavors to introduce new concepts to the institutional discourse on sexual harassment, urging universities to assume not just legal, but also moral responsibility.