We have recently seen a rash of accusations against public figures involving various levels of sexual harassment/assault. Most have been fired by their employers or Boards. Only Roy Moore continues to receive unqualified support from both the Alabama Republican Party and his base.
That these acts were committed is beyond disappointing. To become aware of the extent to which women are subjected to these types of actions, even by respected, upstanding people, both liberal and conservative, is a shock.
As women have come forward and received a receptive hearing, more women have been empowered and found the courage to come forward with their own stories. This is a healthy development. Too long have women feared speaking the truth against men with power over them.
The question is, what should society, what should organizations/employers do in the face of such accusations. There is no question that society is quickly developing a new standard as to what is considered acceptable behavior of men towards women.
While some have always abhorred such behavior, society as a whole has accepted the fact that “men are pigs” and that they do such things. As long as they didn’t cross the line of criminal sexual assault or the age of consent barrier, society just shrugged its shoulder.
That is clearly no longer the case. The question is, should people be punished … and firing someone from their job is being punished … for behavior which at the time, while reprehensible, was accepted by society. Should these standards be applied retroactively?
When laws are passed, they are almost always applied prospectively. Someone cannot be accused and convicted of a crime when the activity was not a crime at the time it happened. That is the way the criminal justice system works; that is essential to its fairness.
I think the same standard should be applied here. If someone’s behavior was either criminal or clearly unacceptable under community standards at the time it occurred, then if the accusation has indicia of truth, the person should be held accountable, punished.
However, if the behavior was not criminal or unacceptable under contemporary standards, then the new standards should not be applied retroactively. The person should, however, offer an abject apology and admit that the complained-of behavior occurred. And they should be called on the carpet and told that if this ever happens again they will be fired.
With regard to someone who is up for election, however, such as Roy Moore, it is for the people to decide whether someone with such a history should receive their vote. A history of sexual harassment or assault is certainly relevant when one is seeking a position of public trust.
