Un-muzzle Victims: Stop Buying Their Silence

Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs). The spate of recent complaints about lecherous, predatory behavior by some prominent men points to a systemic enabling of atrocity by shutting complainers mouths through their signoff on draconian NDAs that usurp the right to speak about the experience. This effectively shuts off ability to serve as a warning for potential future victims. I think NDAs unwittingly aid and abet. And I believe we need to enact legislation that curbs this practice. A better organizational protection is proactive leadership and the fostering of organization cultures that support speaking up, thus protecting victims and not their abusers.

Yesterday ABC News reported that Bob Weinstein was a party to his brother Harvey's indiscretions having actually underwritten NDAs in the nineties, effectively muzzling victims who were paid to shut up and go away. He had recently disavowed knowledge of his brother's transgressions and was a full-throated critic when news of the latter's tendency to prey on women first surfaced. Subsequently women would finger him as an alleged perpetrator as well.

The Case For A Culture Of Accountability

In the latest reveal, venerated journalist Charlie Rose was unmasked as having committed predatory behavior by subjecting Interns to unwanted sexual advances. His behavior dates back to 2005. Perplexingly, some of the victims' stories were known to Yvette Vega, Rose's longtime executive producer, who has now told The Washington Post she regrets not supporting the women whose accounts she had heard about. Incidentally, Rose offered an apology that included his opinion that he believed he was pursuing "shared feelings." By foisting himself on Interns decades younger, with all of the power imbalance at his disposal?

In the case of Weinstein, celebrated film director Quentin Tarantino admitted to the media that he knew of the behavior, bemoaned the fact that he didn't speak out. It turns out the actor Matt Damon, per his confession, was also aware of Weinstein's predilection for preying on women.

And Buzzfeed recently published a report about the way Congress keeps sexual harassment allegations secret. According to them its Office of Compliance paid out $17 million for 264 settlements with federal employees over a 20-year span. Congress reportedly has no Human Resources department, and has an archaic process requiring employees to report incidents to the Office of compliance within 180 days, then puts them through counseling and mediation AND the signing of a confidentiality agreement before a complaint is advanced (buzzfeed). Its members are now shrieking for an overhaul, and a former law clerk who represented a complainant has called the process "disgusting."

All of this underscores the criticality of influencing the male psyche by infusing our culture with a clearer respect for boundaries and the obligation to speak up when witnessing/made aware of unwanted sexual attention being forced on someone. Corporations must go beyond rudimentary, check-the-box training and alter the DNA of their corporate culture. Embed accountability. It's time for senior leaders to take up arms on this issue. Have distinct behavioral goals and zero tolerance for the commission of these acts, and for the looking-the-other-way that is a national pastime. Let's educate and re-educate people about their obligation to respect boundaries; ensure they aren't wielding power as a weapon to foster themselves on others.

The Male Perspective...In Some Instances

To underscore the point about culture-deep change, I read a post on another platform today written by a CEO/social media leader and Forbes writer that illustrates why we need to re-educate people. In his article which was laced with F-bombs he said men are wired to see women's anatomy and go ape, that chasing us is in their DNA and makes logic take flight; that women expect men to make the first move and if we don't consent they are confused. This begs the question how is a man's attractive daughter, sister or mother safe in his company? It shows that this is mostly ludicrous thinking, as men are generally respectful of the boundaries separating female family members from dating prospects. Nonetheless it's possible he really believes this drivel - and while he can't possibly be the voice of every man, this CEO might be representing the views of some. Signs of a troubling, tenuous hold on reality.

What is Your Assessment?

Culture overhaul? Please dive in with your thoughts on the issue - and please spare us partisan vitriol and/or a combative posture. We are at troubling crossroads and this topic is deserving of thoughtful discourse.