The administration retreated and the original policy remains in place. This win belongs to every one of the 394 people who demanded accountability for campus safety standards. Stay sharp because we will continue to monitor these developments to ensure there is no backsliding.
December 15, 2016
Final supporters
Please sign and share in support of our letter:
We are writing in response to the Open Letter from Canadian authors regarding the UBC handling of complaints against Steven Galloway. As scholars, counsellors and activists involved in sexual violence policy development, education and direct services for those who have experienced sexual assault on university campuses, we are deeply concerned about the impact of this letter on survivors of sexual violence, on complainants present and future, on respondents in these cases, and on university faculty and administrators working to provide safe ways for students to come forward and fair treatment for respondents.
The media have reported on this issue in ways which highlight high profile Canadian authors, when in fact a small number of writers have inserted themselves through their access to mass media into an ongoing crisis on campuses across the country. This is damaging to the rights of complainants and respondents everywhere. We are not writing to defend the specifics of the process at UBC, about which we know nothing other than what has been reported in the press. However, from our own work at Canadian universities on sexual violence policy, disciplinary tribunals, and direct support of survivors we do know that the complaint process is deeply shaped by legal, policy, and collective agreement requirements – none of which can simply be set aside. The Open Letter demonstrates little knowledge or interest in significant bodies of law.
Instead, the letter focuses on the accused, as a victim, and presents the accused’s version of events. In doing so it actually lays the groundwork for a media explosion that does not benefit the rights to privacy of complainants or respondents. Signed by numerous influential Canadian authors, it invites us to trust their interpretation about who is the injured party in this case and it promotes public trial. The fallout of the letter and the surrounding media storm has been massive on complainants at large and on students who identify as sexual assault survivors.
It should be understood by writers and signers that attempting to influence an open case, demanding protected private information and identifiers, while circulating potential misinformation in mass media forums, is irresponsible and dangerous. While we deeply respect the work of those who signed this letter and understand they intended to lobby for a fair and transparent process, we hope that they might consider the impact of their actions on all those involved, not simply the accused.
Additionally, the letter cannot hope to achieve its stated goals as it is not a legal petition to government. UBC cannot, by definition, engage independent inquiry into its own practices.
As those working in sexual assault policy development, we also advocate for the processes of investigation and disciplinary processes to be transparent, but this does not necessarily mean the wider public should have access to the content of investigations which include private details of events involving vulnerable parties; this would violate privacy rights of the accused and survivors.
Disturbing as well have been several releases of information protected by laws into social media. The complainants have had their rights to privacy severely abused and their suffering minimized in major media, all without consultation or consent. This precedent has astounding implications as it models large-scale intimidation of any student who might consider speaking out against a faculty member.
The overwhelming majority of research on sexual violence suggests it is most often complainants who are disbelieved. The term ‘rape culture’ is intended to signal a context in which one in four women will experience sexual violence, and yet there is a widespread rationalization of asymmetrical systems of power, and a sense of resignation that violence is inevitable. Indigenous, racialized and LGBTQ+ students and those with mental and physical health challenges face increased risk of violence and substantial barriers when they try to report.
While the Open Letter signed by literary celebrities implies that complaints of sexual violence should be dealt with through the criminal justice system, it fails to recognize that the vast majority of complainants do not report assault to the police, because this system almost never works to hold perpetrators accountable. Furthermore, the assertion that responding to sexual violence is purely the domain of the criminal justice system fails to acknowledge the duty of care that universities have to their students to protect them from campus sexual violence, as well as their legal authority to discipline students, staff, and faculty members who perpetrate sexual assault and harassment.
As Zoe Todd has written (Rabble.ca), when prominent authors in a relatively small Canadian arts community focus only on Mr. Galloway’s experience, this has a powerful negative impact on survivors – an effect that extends far beyond this particular case. We ask you to consider this impact and the impact on the privacy rights of respondents and withdraw the letter.
Updates
November 29, 2016
We just passed one hundred signatures this morning. This momentum proves that scholars and activists are ready to push back against this narrative. Post the link to your Facebook feed and email your local rep to tell them why this policy work matters.
Reached 250 supporters
November 27, 2016
Reached 100 supporters
November 26, 2016
November 25, 2016
We need to hit the 250 signature mark to keep up our momentum before the next round of media discussions. Post this link to your Facebook feed and email your department rep today. We have to keep the pressure on until our point is fully understood.
40 Comments
As a new hire and an Aboriginal female, I have to ask" How far would I get with 'I had an affair with a student'? And would I get compensation?
Not only does the letter show a lack of knowledge and interest in law, it shows a lack of knowledge and interest in union processes and labour relations. Galloway was afforded an external review, flawed as UBCs handling of it may have been. Galloway is not the victim here. Atwood is certainly not a victim nor is Boyden. They are merely people with a platform who are very publicly finding out that yes, your friend can be both a beautiful writer and a rapist.
I sign because it is difficult, even dangerous, for victims to come forward in this system. The so-called "UBC Accountable" folks should know that, and work to make it safer for Canadians to confront gender-based violence and harassment.
I appreciate the framing of this Open Letter and thank the framers for their clarity. Due process must extend to complainants. The grievance process will unfold recognizing the interests of the complainants as well as thiose of the university and the faculty association which is compelled to mount a defence of their member.
Regardless of where you fall on this case -- the precedent this Open letter and the fallout from it sets for public lobbying around well known individuals (whatever side they are on) is dangerous. This is not in the interest of complainants or respondents.
I sign this letter as a student of writing. I want to become a writer. I dream of becoming a writer, and as a survivor of sexual violence, this is the only dream I have left. I am in the process of submitting my applications to Creative Writing programs across Canada and in the US, and part of me is afraid of what signing this letter will do to me, to my name, to my ability to write, and to my voice. And part of me is tired of living with fear. And so the first thing I will do with my voice will be to add my name to this letter: Shullie Solanis.
I have little profile as a writer. I sign this letter with some anxiety: will my name here affect me? Will one of the UBC Signatories be a judge or editor, and will my signature on this petition be held against me? That feeling of intimidation is the result of the UBCAccountable Open Letter. This is a fraction of the anxiety felt by students.... I work with young people who have been impacted by trauma. I studied creative writing at a Canadian university. I teach at a Canadian university now. Intimate relationships, artistic and otherwise, happen in creative writing programs -- perhaps more than in other programs, for writing is so close to the heart, the self, the core. I quote Maggie Helwig, "The person with the greater power has the duty to maintain boundaries, regardless of other circumstances." Professors and mentors, you have emotional power and practical power. Do not date your students. Can't believe I actually have to say that out loud.
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
The administration retreated and the original policy remains in place. This win belongs to every one of the 394 people who demanded accountability for campus safety standards. Stay sharp because we will continue to monitor these developments to ensure there is no backsliding.
December 15, 2016
Final supporters
Please sign and share in support of our letter:
We are writing in response to the Open Letter from Canadian authors regarding the UBC handling of complaints against Steven Galloway. As scholars, counsellors and activists involved in sexual violence policy development, education and direct services for those who have experienced sexual assault on university campuses, we are deeply concerned about the impact of this letter on survivors of sexual violence, on complainants present and future, on respondents in these cases, and on university faculty and administrators working to provide safe ways for students to come forward and fair treatment for respondents.
The media have reported on this issue in ways which highlight high profile Canadian authors, when in fact a small number of writers have inserted themselves through their access to mass media into an ongoing crisis on campuses across the country. This is damaging to the rights of complainants and respondents everywhere. We are not writing to defend the specifics of the process at UBC, about which we know nothing other than what has been reported in the press. However, from our own work at Canadian universities on sexual violence policy, disciplinary tribunals, and direct support of survivors we do know that the complaint process is deeply shaped by legal, policy, and collective agreement requirements – none of which can simply be set aside. The Open Letter demonstrates little knowledge or interest in significant bodies of law.
Instead, the letter focuses on the accused, as a victim, and presents the accused’s version of events. In doing so it actually lays the groundwork for a media explosion that does not benefit the rights to privacy of complainants or respondents. Signed by numerous influential Canadian authors, it invites us to trust their interpretation about who is the injured party in this case and it promotes public trial. The fallout of the letter and the surrounding media storm has been massive on complainants at large and on students who identify as sexual assault survivors.
It should be understood by writers and signers that attempting to influence an open case, demanding protected private information and identifiers, while circulating potential misinformation in mass media forums, is irresponsible and dangerous. While we deeply respect the work of those who signed this letter and understand they intended to lobby for a fair and transparent process, we hope that they might consider the impact of their actions on all those involved, not simply the accused.
Additionally, the letter cannot hope to achieve its stated goals as it is not a legal petition to government. UBC cannot, by definition, engage independent inquiry into its own practices.
As those working in sexual assault policy development, we also advocate for the processes of investigation and disciplinary processes to be transparent, but this does not necessarily mean the wider public should have access to the content of investigations which include private details of events involving vulnerable parties; this would violate privacy rights of the accused and survivors.
Disturbing as well have been several releases of information protected by laws into social media. The complainants have had their rights to privacy severely abused and their suffering minimized in major media, all without consultation or consent. This precedent has astounding implications as it models large-scale intimidation of any student who might consider speaking out against a faculty member.
The overwhelming majority of research on sexual violence suggests it is most often complainants who are disbelieved. The term ‘rape culture’ is intended to signal a context in which one in four women will experience sexual violence, and yet there is a widespread rationalization of asymmetrical systems of power, and a sense of resignation that violence is inevitable. Indigenous, racialized and LGBTQ+ students and those with mental and physical health challenges face increased risk of violence and substantial barriers when they try to report.
While the Open Letter signed by literary celebrities implies that complaints of sexual violence should be dealt with through the criminal justice system, it fails to recognize that the vast majority of complainants do not report assault to the police, because this system almost never works to hold perpetrators accountable. Furthermore, the assertion that responding to sexual violence is purely the domain of the criminal justice system fails to acknowledge the duty of care that universities have to their students to protect them from campus sexual violence, as well as their legal authority to discipline students, staff, and faculty members who perpetrate sexual assault and harassment.
As Zoe Todd has written (Rabble.ca), when prominent authors in a relatively small Canadian arts community focus only on Mr. Galloway’s experience, this has a powerful negative impact on survivors – an effect that extends far beyond this particular case. We ask you to consider this impact and the impact on the privacy rights of respondents and withdraw the letter.
Updates
November 29, 2016
We just passed one hundred signatures this morning. This momentum proves that scholars and activists are ready to push back against this narrative. Post the link to your Facebook feed and email your local rep to tell them why this policy work matters.
Reached 250 supporters
November 27, 2016
Reached 100 supporters
November 26, 2016
November 25, 2016
We need to hit the 250 signature mark to keep up our momentum before the next round of media discussions. Post this link to your Facebook feed and email your department rep today. We have to keep the pressure on until our point is fully understood.
40 Comments
Society’s default position in a ‘he said-she said’ sexual harassment case is to believe what he said and dump what she said into the garbage. That so many Canadian authors fell into that trap and formed a national literary block against the complainants is astonishing.
As a new hire and an Aboriginal female, I have to ask" How far would I get with 'I had an affair with a student'? And would I get compensation?
Not only does the letter show a lack of knowledge and interest in law, it shows a lack of knowledge and interest in union processes and labour relations. Galloway was afforded an external review, flawed as UBCs handling of it may have been. Galloway is not the victim here. Atwood is certainly not a victim nor is Boyden. They are merely people with a platform who are very publicly finding out that yes, your friend can be both a beautiful writer and a rapist.
I sign because it is difficult, even dangerous, for victims to come forward in this system. The so-called "UBC Accountable" folks should know that, and work to make it safer for Canadians to confront gender-based violence and harassment.
I appreciate the framing of this Open Letter and thank the framers for their clarity. Due process must extend to complainants. The grievance process will unfold recognizing the interests of the complainants as well as thiose of the university and the faculty association which is compelled to mount a defence of their member.
Regardless of where you fall on this case -- the precedent this Open letter and the fallout from it sets for public lobbying around well known individuals (whatever side they are on) is dangerous. This is not in the interest of complainants or respondents.
I sign this letter as a student of writing. I want to become a writer. I dream of becoming a writer, and as a survivor of sexual violence, this is the only dream I have left. I am in the process of submitting my applications to Creative Writing programs across Canada and in the US, and part of me is afraid of what signing this letter will do to me, to my name, to my ability to write, and to my voice. And part of me is tired of living with fear. And so the first thing I will do with my voice will be to add my name to this letter: Shullie Solanis.
I have little profile as a writer. I sign this letter with some anxiety: will my name here affect me? Will one of the UBC Signatories be a judge or editor, and will my signature on this petition be held against me? That feeling of intimidation is the result of the UBCAccountable Open Letter. This is a fraction of the anxiety felt by students.... I work with young people who have been impacted by trauma. I studied creative writing at a Canadian university. I teach at a Canadian university now. Intimate relationships, artistic and otherwise, happen in creative writing programs -- perhaps more than in other programs, for writing is so close to the heart, the self, the core. I quote Maggie Helwig, "The person with the greater power has the duty to maintain boundaries, regardless of other circumstances." Professors and mentors, you have emotional power and practical power. Do not date your students. Can't believe I actually have to say that out loud.
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
Society’s default position in a ‘he said-she said’ sexual harassment case is to believe what he said and dump what she said into the garbage. That so many Canadian authors fell into that trap and formed a national literary block against the complainants is astonishing.