Student-Professor Sexual Relationships

[Caracal]

If we distinguish between relationships between on the one hand faculty and their current students, or students who they have direct power over, and on the other hand, faculty and students who they have only very indirect authority, we can probably sort out a lot of the problems with abuses of the teacher-student relationship and special treatment (positive or negative) of the student by the faculty member.

For most faculty, most students are, to borrow a phrase, just warm bodies. I don't see anything particular special about the pedagogical teacher-student relationship that means we should  apply different standards to it.

Well I don't think of my students that way... I don't think I'd be a very good instructor if I did. And that's why I just don't agree. I think this is much more akin to professional rules that doctors or therapists have around dating students. The point of the rules is not that the relationships would inherently be abusive or bad for those involved. The principle is that introducing sex and dating into that realm, threatens the relationship necessary for the profession to work as intended.

How exactly this works probably has to depend on institution. If we are talking about a small liberal arts college, I think a no involvement with current students policy makes a lot of sense. Probably the same policy at a large regional University with lots of older students would be unworkable.

[marshwiggle]

One other concern would be for the relationship to disintegrate and result in a #metoo moment at which case the faculty member is at risk even more than the student.  Didn't David Mamet write a play more or less to that effect?

The #metoo moment occurs when a person of power uses that power to extract sexual favors from someone, with the threat of damage to their career if they refuse. It is not

-A broken relationship
-An accusation of misconduct
-A general feeling of sympathy for the wrongdoer who should have known better than to get involved.

I am sympathetic to people who are wrongly accused of sexual misconduct and have their careers damaged as a result. But those situations are not #metoo moments, and I really wish people would stop lumping them all together. The conflation only does damage to the genuine situations.

But the very nature (and name) of the movement encourage people to "join the club" and share their experiences. The number of people having had some sort of regrettable experience is much greater than the number who have actually experienced a direct abuse of power but "meTOO" suggests that everyone should consider their experience as completely within the bounds of what is considered.

[downer]

If we distinguish between relationships between on the one hand faculty and their current students, or students who they have direct power over, and on the other hand, faculty and students who they have only very indirect authority, we can probably sort out a lot of the problems with abuses of the teacher-student relationship and special treatment (positive or negative) of the student by the faculty member.

For most faculty, most students are, to borrow a phrase, just warm bodies. I don't see anything particular special about the pedagogical teacher-student relationship that means we should  apply different standards to it.

Well I don't think of my students that way... I don't think I'd be a very good instructor if I did. And that's why I just don't agree. I think this is much more akin to professional rules that doctors or therapists have around dating students. The point of the rules is not that the relationships would inherently be abusive or bad for those involved. The principle is that introducing sex and dating into that realm, threatens the relationship necessary for the profession to work as intended.

How exactly this works probably has to depend on institution. If we are talking about a small liberal arts college, I think a no involvement with current students policy makes a lot of sense. Probably the same policy at a large regional University with lots of older students would be unworkable.

I see what you mean and there is plenty of variation from person to person, place to place, and it may depend on whether a faculty member is developing an educational relationship with a student in their major over 4 years versus teaching a large gen ed class for a semester. Are those professional relationships different in kind from other everyday relationships with one's car mechanic, doctor, yoga instructor, mail deliverer, co-workers, bosses, or life coach? I know that sometimes the student-teacher relationship can be intense and personal, but then so can other relationships. As I've said, I'm not inclined to think that there's something particularly special about that student-teacher relationship, but there will be some exceptions.

[Hibush]

I see what you mean and there is plenty of variation from person to person, place to place, and it may depend on whether a faculty member is developing an educational relationship with a student in their major over 4 years versus teaching a large gen ed class for a semester. Are those professional relationships different in kind from other everyday relationships with one's car mechanic, doctor, yoga instructor, mail deliverer, co-workers, bosses, or life coach? I know that sometimes the student-teacher relationship can be intense and personal, but then so can other relationships. As I've said, I'm not inclined to think that there's something particularly special about that student-teacher relationship, but there will be some exceptions.

If someone else in town is hot for the car mechanic, it doesn't affect how your car is repaired. But if another student in your class is in a relationship with the instructor, it has a big impact on your educational experience. That's a difference that institutional policies should address.


Do you think your school's rules are clearly drawn and appropriate to the type of institution?

[downer]

I see what you mean and there is plenty of variation from person to person, place to place, and it may depend on whether a faculty member is developing an educational relationship with a student in their major over 4 years versus teaching a large gen ed class for a semester. Are those professional relationships different in kind from other everyday relationships with one's car mechanic, doctor, yoga instructor, mail deliverer, co-workers, bosses, or life coach? I know that sometimes the student-teacher relationship can be intense and personal, but then so can other relationships. As I've said, I'm not inclined to think that there's something particularly special about that student-teacher relationship, but there will be some exceptions.

If someone else in town is hot for the car mechanic, it doesn't affect how your car is repaired. But if another student in your class is in a relationship with the instructor, it has a big impact on your educational experience. That's a difference that institutional policies should address.


Do you think your school's rules are clearly drawn and appropriate to the type of institution?

I'm not so confident about your predictions regarding the mechanic or the class. But I agree that in a class, a professor should not be having a torrid relationship with a current student. (I'm less sure that it is a problem to have one's spouse in a class.) And if you are dating a car mechanic, they should give you a deal on working on your car.

I am teaching at 3 schools this semester. I have no idea what the precise policy is at any of the schools. No one has ever mentioned it. I don't think it has even been in those mandatory online training/indoctrination certificates I have had to go through.

[marshwiggle]

Are those professional relationships different in kind from other everyday relationships with one's car mechanic, doctor, yoga instructor, mail deliverer, co-workers, bosses, or life coach? I know that sometimes the student-teacher relationship can be intense and personal, but then so can other relationships. As I've said, I'm not inclined to think that there's something particularly special about that student-teacher relationship, but there will be some exceptions.

I'm not so confident about your predictions regarding the mechanic or the class. But I agree that in a class, a professor should not be having a torrid relationship with a current student. And if you are dating a car mechanic, they should give you a deal on working on your car.

This is why these relationships are fundamentally different, unless you think profs should grade someone they're in a relationship with differently.

(I'm less sure that it is a problem to have one's spouse in a class.)

So having someone that you are definitely having sex with (one supposes) is less of a problem than someone who you might have sex with???? That makes no sense at all.

[downer]

Hmm. Maybe you haven't been married.

[Caracal]

I'm not so confident about your predictions regarding the mechanic or the class. But I agree that in a class, a professor should not be having a torrid relationship with a current student. (I'm less sure that it is a problem to have one's spouse in a class.)

I think it is still pretty bad if a professor begins a relationship with a student after the class. First of all it raises the question of fairness. If the instructor was thinking of asking a student out or had romantic feelings they later acted on, how can we know that doesn't effect the grade. More to the point, how can other students know that. It also introduces the possibility that the instructor sees his classes as a dating pool and this perception might extend to other professors who have nothing to do with the relationship.

When a student takes one of my classes, we do enter into a relationship. Often, the connection is pretty shallow, the student takes the class, gets a grade and moves on. But, sometimes I get to know students better and I keep seeing them after the class ends. But, I can't imagine having these relationships with students without clear boundaries. A student might take another class with me, I might write them a letter of rec, they might ask me for advice about something with their academic careers. I am not going to sleep with them. It just isn't a possible option and if it becomes one, or students believe that it is in the range of things that could occur, everything gets screwed up.

[marshwiggle]

Hmm. Maybe you haven't been married.

For supposing that they'd be having sex? Or for suggesting that sharing a house, bank account, children, and a remote control with someone might make one less likely to be completely objective?

[ergative]

One other concern would be for the relationship to disintegrate and result in a #metoo moment at which case the faculty member is at risk even more than the student.  Didn't David Mamet write a play more or less to that effect?

The #metoo moment occurs when a person of power uses that power to extract sexual favors from someone, with the threat of damage to their career if they refuse. It is not

-A broken relationship
-An accusation of misconduct
-A general feeling of sympathy for the wrongdoer who should have known better than to get involved.

I am sympathetic to people who are wrongly accused of sexual misconduct and have their careers damaged as a result. But those situations are not #metoo moments, and I really wish people would stop lumping them all together. The conflation only does damage to the genuine situations.

But the very nature (and name) of the movement encourage people to "join the club" and share their experiences. The number of people having had some sort of regrettable experience is much greater than the number who have actually experienced a direct abuse of power but "meTOO" suggests that everyone should consider their experience as completely within the bounds of what is considered.

No, dude, 'meTOO' is because these direct abuses of power are more common than many would believe or be willing to admit. It's not 'Come join our club'. It's 'How could you have miss this huge honking clubhouse in the middle of your living room all this time?'

We are not trying to persuade people---mostly women---to reconsider their experiences in a new light. We are trying to persuade other people---mostly men---to recognize that our experiences are common, not exceptional.

The fact that the interpretation keeps shifting away from that is evidence that people---mostly men---are not listening.

[secundem_artem]

One other concern would be for the relationship to disintegrate and result in a #metoo moment at which case the faculty member is at risk even more than the student.  Didn't David Mamet write a play more or less to that effect?

The #metoo moment occurs when a person of power uses that power to extract sexual favors from someone, with the threat of damage to their career if they refuse. It is not

-A broken relationship
-An accusation of misconduct
-A general feeling of sympathy for the wrongdoer who should have known better than to get involved.

I am sympathetic to people who are wrongly accused of sexual misconduct and have their careers damaged as a result. But those situations are not #metoo moments, and I really wish people would stop lumping them all together. The conflation only does damage to the genuine situations.

But the very nature (and name) of the movement encourage people to "join the club" and share their experiences. The number of people having had some sort of regrettable experience is much greater than the number who have actually experienced a direct abuse of power but "meTOO" suggests that everyone should consider their experience as completely within the bounds of what is considered.

No, dude, 'meTOO' is because these direct abuses of power are more common than many would believe or be willing to admit. It's not 'Come join our club'. It's 'How could you have miss this huge honking clubhouse in the middle of your living room all this time?'

We are not trying to persuade people---mostly women---to reconsider their experiences in a new light. We are trying to persuade other people---mostly men---to recognize that our experiences are common, not exceptional.

The fact that the interpretation keeps shifting away from that is evidence that people---mostly men---are not listening.

As the poster who originally used the #metoo analogy, I do take your point but would also offer that when it comes to hashtags and other kinds of social media in the ether at any given time, I don't think there is some universally agreed upon definition.  I'll take this as a learning experience and try and be more careful in my terminology.

[marshwiggle]

But the very nature (and name) of the movement encourage people to "join the club" and share their experiences. The number of people having had some sort of regrettable experience is much greater than the number who have actually experienced a direct abuse of power but "meTOO" suggests that everyone should consider their experience as completely within the bounds of what is considered.

No, dude, 'meTOO' is because these direct abuses of power are more common than many would believe or be willing to admit. It's not 'Come join our club'. It's 'How could you have miss this huge honking clubhouse in the middle of your living room all this time?'

We are not trying to persuade people---mostly women---to reconsider their experiences in a new light. We are trying to persuade other people---mostly men---to recognize that our experiences are common, not exceptional.

The fact that the interpretation keeps shifting away from that is evidence that people---mostly men---are not listening.

My point is that "metoo" is used in relation to Bill Cosby AND Aziz Ansari. Suggesting these are similar examples of "women having bad experiences with men" is like saying a hurricane and a light drizzle are similar examples of "rain".

[bio-nonymous]

I think the power dynamic is the big question here. Two fully grown adults with no power or level of control in workplace/school between them are very different from a professor dating their grad student. A former colleague at a different institution from where I am at now had began dating her married professor/PhD advisor and they are still dating years later. Supposedly they cannot get married because she desires to move back to her PhD institution in his department and the rules at the institution prevent a spouse from hired into the same program (this is not a school in the US) because of nepotism. But, apparently dating your grad student was not prohibited? None the less, I think this is very nuanced. As others have hinted at, suppose a returning adult student in nursing meets an English professor at yoga class. They would not know each other from School, only from the community. Should they be prevented from dating by an overarching rule? I don't know...

[Caracal]

But the very nature (and name) of the movement encourage people to "join the club" and share their experiences. The number of people having had some sort of regrettable experience is much greater than the number who have actually experienced a direct abuse of power but "meTOO" suggests that everyone should consider their experience as completely within the bounds of what is considered.

No, dude, 'meTOO' is because these direct abuses of power are more common than many would believe or be willing to admit. It's not 'Come join our club'. It's 'How could you have miss this huge honking clubhouse in the middle of your living room all this time?'

We are not trying to persuade people---mostly women---to reconsider their experiences in a new light. We are trying to persuade other people---mostly men---to recognize that our experiences are common, not exceptional.

The fact that the interpretation keeps shifting away from that is evidence that people---mostly men---are not listening.

My point is that "metoo" is used in relation to Bill Cosby AND Aziz Ansari. Suggesting these are similar examples of "women having bad experiences with men" is like saying a hurricane and a light drizzle are similar examples of "rain".

Me Too was a hashtag and then became an amorphous cultural movement. It isn't an organization or a club, so there's no way to police its boundaries. People can argue about what the boundaries should be and if something like what Azis Ansari did fits within the larger context or not, and they have. Almost immediately most of the discussion I saw about him was about where this fit within the discussion and almost everyone agreed that it was a different sort of accusation from others.

If being connected to metoo by itself meant some sort of clear punishment or sanction, than you might have a point. But it doesn't. Bill Cosby is in jail, Matt Lauer has basically disappeared, Louis C.K's career has gone down the tubes, at least for the moment. Aziz Ansari just had a new Netflix special. Despite "being connected to the metoo movement" he isn't generally being treated as someone who did something unforgivable.

[ciao_yall]

But the very nature (and name) of the movement encourage people to "join the club" and share their experiences. The number of people having had some sort of regrettable experience is much greater than the number who have actually experienced a direct abuse of power but "meTOO" suggests that everyone should consider their experience as completely within the bounds of what is considered.

No, dude, 'meTOO' is because these direct abuses of power are more common than many would believe or be willing to admit. It's not 'Come join our club'. It's 'How could you have miss this huge honking clubhouse in the middle of your living room all this time?'

We are not trying to persuade people---mostly women---to reconsider their experiences in a new light. We are trying to persuade other people---mostly men---to recognize that our experiences are common, not exceptional.

The fact that the interpretation keeps shifting away from that is evidence that people---mostly men---are not listening.

My point is that "metoo" is used in relation to Bill Cosby AND Aziz Ansari. Suggesting these are similar examples of "women having bad experiences with men" is like saying a hurricane and a light drizzle are similar examples of "rain".

Bill Cosby drugged women and sexually assaulted them.

Aziz Ansari had a bad date.

Big difference.