Skip to main content

Kirsten Gillibrand's good call on 'fat' comments

By Pepper Schwartz
updated 8:00 AM EDT, Tue September 2, 2014
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand's new book reveals that her colleagues called her fat and porky
  • Pepper Schwartz: Gillibrand doesn't need to tell names; this is a bigger issue of sexism
  • She says men need to act professionally and respectfully toward women in any workplace
  • Schwartz: Gillibrand doesn't out names because she wants trust and efficacy at her job

Editor's note: Pepper Schwartz is professor of sociology at the University of Washington and the author of many books, the latest of which is "The Normal Bar." She is the love and relationship ambassador for AARP and writes the Naked Truth column for AARP.org. She is also a senior fellow at the Council on Contemporary Families, a nonprofit organization that gathers research on American families. The opinions in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand's new book reveals that her colleagues in Congress have called her "porky" and "fat" and made other remarks about her weight. Yes, of course the public is outraged by her insensitive colleagues. Should we know who did the name-calling? And should they be shamed into offering public apologies?

Here's the thing: The flurry about whether Gillibrand should disclose names is the fatuous response of reporters who, for their own professional goals, would love a further gnashing of teeth.

Gillibrand has clearly shown it's not easy to be in a boys club in Congress. But she doesn't owe anyone to reveal names. This is not about a bunch of crude senators, it's about men needing to know how to behave professionally and respectfully toward women in any workplace environment.

Pepper Schwartz
Pepper Schwartz

There are two good reasons Gillibrand did not reveal names. One is to keep the conversation about the problem of harassment in general rather than focus on specific colleagues. Two, she has to work alongside her colleagues. If she named names, she would be seen as a snitch, even to those men who agreed that egregious treatment had occurred. She would lose support, trust and efficacy.

It's not supposed to be this way. Yet haven't we all swallowed some lousy treatment in order to get our job done? Yes, there are employment laws to protect us. But while it might save our job, it will not restore a workable climate.

In my personal experience, I wished I had the guts to tell some of my professors in graduate school to stuff it. There would be faculty-student parties where we were all flirtatious -- no problem. That was the late 1960s, a bit of sexual intrigue was expected in social situations. But being pawed during a random academic conversation or whispered unwelcome sexual suggestions repeatedly after refusing them was tiresome. While I was annoyed, I wasn't punished professionally for refusing sexual invitations, and so I just fended off the offenders rather than make a formal complaint.

Senator says lawmaker called her 'porky'

I had far more to lose if I spoke out than if I kept quiet. So, I understand why some women make the decision to create a dialogue about this issue rather than go after the person who was inappropriate. It's easy for others to say that names should be named, but in Gillibrand's case, what good would it do and what political gains would be lost?

Most members of Congress know who is piggy already -- and do they do anything about it? No. Unless it's something terrible, like rape or sexual assault, they let "little things" like a random sexist comment, a minor grope, or a sexual innuendo pass. They have a tacit agreement to not rock the boat on these things, especially if the offender votes the way you need him to vote.

To this point, I remember a serious incident from over 30 years ago. An acquaintance of mine on the East Coast was working for a senator and she had a highly placed position. She quit within a week of her appointment and went to live in another state. I happened to be in her city at the time and met her for coffee because I was so shocked at the abrupt end of her fabulous job. She had bruises up and down her arm and told me her boss had tried to wrestle her into sexual submission. I could scarcely believe it and encouraged her to report the incident to the police.

She said if she did report the attack, she would never get a political job again, and if she caused the downfall of the politician in question, who represented her political values, she worried that important close votes might end with the other side winning. She never did anything.

This is not what we want victims to do. But let's face it -- sometimes people have deeply held goals that they rank even higher than their own rights and dignity. They want to do their job or they want to further their values, and if the insults are minor enough (like being called chubby) you take it and wait for the right time to address it in a way that does not undermine your work or your job.

Kristen Gillibrand took this path. She wants to put her colleagues on notice that some of them are insulting and inappropriate and that their remarks about her body or sexual allure are gross, unwelcome and unprofessional. She knows that other women out there get similar treatment or worse and she wants to give notice from her more protected perch as an elected official that men who feel entitled to make these kinds of demeaning comments better cut it out.

Gillibrand stopped short at naming names because she is not vengeful, petty or inconsiderate. It's a sad fact, but sometimes women have to make a choice between identifying people who have humiliated and undermined them and letting those people stay anonymous so they can finish the work they got hired, or elected, to do.

Read CNNOpinion's new Flipboard magazine

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
updated 1:33 AM EST, Thu December 25, 2014
Danny Cevallos says the legislature didn't have to get involved in regulating how people greet each other
updated 6:12 PM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
Marc Harrold suggests a way to move forward after the deaths of NYPD officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos.
updated 8:36 AM EST, Wed December 24, 2014
Simon Moya-Smith says Mah-hi-vist Goodblanket, who was killed by law enforcement officers, deserves justice.
updated 2:14 PM EST, Wed December 24, 2014
Val Lauder says that for 1,700 years, people have been debating when, and how, to celebrate Christmas
updated 3:27 PM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
Raphael Sperry says architects should change their ethics code to ban involvement in designing torture chambers
updated 10:35 PM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
Paul Callan says Sony is right to call for blocking the tweeting of private emails stolen by hackers
updated 7:57 AM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
As Christmas arrives, eyes turn naturally toward Bethlehem. But have we got our history of Christmas right? Jay Parini explores.
updated 11:29 PM EST, Mon December 22, 2014
The late Joe Cocker somehow found himself among the rock 'n' roll aristocracy who showed up in Woodstock to help administer a collective blessing upon a generation.
updated 4:15 PM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
History may not judge Obama kindly on Syria or even Iraq. But for a lame duck president, he seems to have quacking left to do, says Aaron Miller.
updated 1:11 PM EST, Tue December 23, 2014
Terrorism and WMD -- it's easy to understand why these consistently make the headlines. But small arms can be devastating too, says Rachel Stohl.
updated 1:08 PM EST, Mon December 22, 2014
Ever since "Bridge-gate" threatened to derail Chris Christie's chances for 2016, Jeb Bush has been hinting he might run. Julian Zelizer looks at why he could win.
updated 1:53 PM EST, Sat December 20, 2014
New York's decision to ban hydraulic fracturing was more about politics than good environmental policy, argues Jeremy Carl.
updated 3:19 PM EST, Sat December 20, 2014
On perhaps this year's most compelling drama, the credits have yet to roll. But we still need to learn some cyber lessons to protect America, suggest John McCain.
updated 5:39 PM EST, Mon December 22, 2014
Conservatives know easing the trade embargo with Cuba is good for America. They should just admit it, says Fareed Zakaria.
updated 8:12 PM EST, Fri December 19, 2014
We're a world away from Pakistan in geography, but not in sentiment, writes Donna Brazile.
updated 12:09 PM EST, Fri December 19, 2014
How about a world where we have murderers but no murders? The police still chase down criminals who commit murder, we have trials and justice is handed out...but no one dies.
updated 6:45 PM EST, Thu December 18, 2014
The U.S. must respond to North Korea's alleged hacking of Sony, says Christian Whiton. Failing to do so will only embolden it.
updated 4:34 PM EST, Fri December 19, 2014
President Obama has been flexing his executive muscles lately despite Democrat's losses, writes Gloria Borger
updated 2:51 PM EST, Thu December 18, 2014
Jeff Yang says the film industry's surrender will have lasting implications.
updated 4:13 PM EST, Thu December 18, 2014
Newt Gingrich: No one should underestimate the historic importance of the collapse of American defenses in the Sony Pictures attack.
updated 7:55 AM EST, Wed December 10, 2014
Dean Obeidallah asks how the genuine Stephen Colbert will do, compared to "Stephen Colbert"
updated 12:34 PM EST, Thu December 18, 2014
Some GOP politicians want drug tests for welfare recipients; Eric Liu says bailed-out execs should get equal treatment
updated 8:42 AM EST, Thu December 18, 2014
Louis Perez: Obama introduced a long-absent element of lucidity into U.S. policy on Cuba.
updated 12:40 PM EST, Tue December 16, 2014
The slaughter of more than 130 children by the Pakistani Taliban may prove as pivotal to Pakistan's security policy as the 9/11 attacks were for the U.S., says Peter Bergen.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT