#MeToo, Time’s Up, and Theories of Justice

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW University of Illinois Law Review Pub Date : 2018-03-06 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.3135442
Lesley M Wexler, J. Robbennolt, C. Murphy
{"title":"#MeToo, Time’s Up, and Theories of Justice","authors":"Lesley M Wexler, J. Robbennolt, C. Murphy","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3135442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Allegations against movie-mogul Harvey Weinstein and the ensuing #MeToo movement opened the floodgates to a modern day reckoning with sex discrimination in the workplace. High level and high profile individuals across industries have been fired, suspended, and resigned. At the same time, serious concerns have been raised about useful processes for non-privileged women, due process for those accused of misconduct, and the need for proportionate consequences. And there have been calls for both restorative and transitional justice in addressing this problem. But these calls have not been explicit about what sort of restoration or transformation is envisioned. \nThis article explores the meaning, utility, and complexities of restorative and transitional justice for dealing with sexual misconduct in the workplace. We begin by documenting the restorative origins of #MeToo as well as exploring steps taken, most prominently by Time’s Up, to amplify and credit survivors’ voices, seek accountability, change workplace practices, and encourage access to the legal system. We then take up the call for restorative justice by exploring its key components — including acknowledgement, responsibility-taking, harm repair, non-repetition, and reintegration — with an eye toward how these components might apply in the context of addressing sexual harassment in the workplace. \nWe conclude by looking more broadly to the insights of transitional justice. We identify some shared features of transitional societies and the #MeToo setting, including structural inequalities, a history of denial and the normalization of wrongful behavior, and uncertainty about the way forward. We then provide guidance for ongoing reform efforts. First, we emphasize the vital importance of including and addressing the interests of marginalized groups within the larger movement both because we need to know and acknowledge specific intersectional harms and also because doing so helps model the kinds of equal relationships that marginalized groups seek across other dimensions such as race, sexual orientation, gender orientation, and disability. Second, we highlight the need for holism and mixed types of responses in trying to spur societal change.","PeriodicalId":47018,"journal":{"name":"University of Illinois Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.3135442","citationCount":"37","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Illinois Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3135442","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 37

Abstract

Allegations against movie-mogul Harvey Weinstein and the ensuing #MeToo movement opened the floodgates to a modern day reckoning with sex discrimination in the workplace. High level and high profile individuals across industries have been fired, suspended, and resigned. At the same time, serious concerns have been raised about useful processes for non-privileged women, due process for those accused of misconduct, and the need for proportionate consequences. And there have been calls for both restorative and transitional justice in addressing this problem. But these calls have not been explicit about what sort of restoration or transformation is envisioned. This article explores the meaning, utility, and complexities of restorative and transitional justice for dealing with sexual misconduct in the workplace. We begin by documenting the restorative origins of #MeToo as well as exploring steps taken, most prominently by Time’s Up, to amplify and credit survivors’ voices, seek accountability, change workplace practices, and encourage access to the legal system. We then take up the call for restorative justice by exploring its key components — including acknowledgement, responsibility-taking, harm repair, non-repetition, and reintegration — with an eye toward how these components might apply in the context of addressing sexual harassment in the workplace. We conclude by looking more broadly to the insights of transitional justice. We identify some shared features of transitional societies and the #MeToo setting, including structural inequalities, a history of denial and the normalization of wrongful behavior, and uncertainty about the way forward. We then provide guidance for ongoing reform efforts. First, we emphasize the vital importance of including and addressing the interests of marginalized groups within the larger movement both because we need to know and acknowledge specific intersectional harms and also because doing so helps model the kinds of equal relationships that marginalized groups seek across other dimensions such as race, sexual orientation, gender orientation, and disability. Second, we highlight the need for holism and mixed types of responses in trying to spur societal change.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
#MeToo,时间到了,正义理论
针对电影大亨哈维·韦恩斯坦(Harvey Weinstein)的指控以及随后的#MeToo运动,为现代社会对工作场所性别歧视的反思打开了闸门。各行各业的高层和知名人士被解雇、停职和辞职。与此同时,人们对对没有特权的妇女的有用程序、对被控不当行为的人的适当程序以及对适当后果的需要表示严重关切。在解决这一问题时,一直有人呼吁恢复性司法和过渡司法。但是,这些呼吁并没有明确说明他们设想的是什么样的恢复或改造。本文探讨了处理工作场所不当性行为的恢复性和过渡性司法的意义、效用和复杂性。我们首先记录了#MeToo运动的恢复性起源,并探讨了采取的措施,最突出的是Time ' s Up,以扩大和信任幸存者的声音,寻求问责,改变工作场所的做法,并鼓励诉诸法律体系。然后,我们通过探索恢复性司法的关键组成部分——包括承认、承担责任、修复伤害、不再重复和重新融入社会——来呼吁恢复性司法,并着眼于如何将这些组成部分应用于解决工作场所性骚扰的背景下。最后,我们将更广泛地探讨过渡时期司法的见解。我们确定了转型社会和#MeToo背景的一些共同特征,包括结构性不平等、否认和错误行为正常化的历史,以及对未来道路的不确定性。然后,我们为正在进行的改革工作提供指导。首先,我们强调在更大的运动中包括和处理边缘群体的利益至关重要,因为我们需要知道和承认特定的交叉伤害,也因为这样做有助于建立边缘群体在种族、性取向、性别取向和残疾等其他方面寻求的平等关系的模型。其次,我们强调在试图推动社会变革时需要整体主义和混合类型的反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
Education Contracts of Adhesion in the COVID-19 Pandemic Justice on the Line: Prosecutorial Screening Before Arrest #MeToo, Time’s Up, and Theories of Justice Solving 'Problems No One Has Solved': Courts, Causal Inference, and the Right to Education Human Rights in the British Constitution : A Prisoner of History
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1