Hypocrisy is a curious human condition, and one that is important both to experience and to take note of, whether in oneself or in others. Rarely, however, is it a completely benign phenomenon with few consequences. The results of such conflict between action and rhetoric can be seen in stark relief thanks to the media: recently, through this powerful conduit of information, yet another glaring case of hypocrisy has sprung up that stuck out to me the same way a particularly egregious typo stands out in an email.
Harvard announced in early February a revamp to its policies regarding interpersonal relationships. This new policy includes an outright ban on romantic relationships between professors and students in a shift that clarified earlier language deeming such interactions as only “inappropriate.” Some people I’ve spoken with have shrugged at the distinction — claiming it’s not too different from the preexisting policy, but Harvardexplained its choice by declaring that “relationships of unequal status did not explicitly reflect the faculty’s expectations of what constituted an appropriate relationship between undergraduate students and faculty members.” By clarifying expectations in this way, some questions of consent can be more clear-cut by removing problematic power dynamics from the mix.
I’ve heard few negative reactions in response to this announcement, both in the media and in everyday conversation. Though there are those who argue that this policy is too cut and dry, since it leaves little room for individual cases and for both parties’ autonomy, most concede that it still is, in general, a positive move. I personally do not have a strong opinion either way on the matter of this policy. To me, this is the rhetoric side of the aforementioned instance of hypocrisy — the action, then, is the overwhelming response to the release of the "Fifty Shades of Grey"movie.
My personal response to "Fifty Shades of Grey"is nearly entirely negative and, as such, I have many issues with "Fifty Shades of Grey"beyond what I plan to write about here, particularly with regard to the way in which it construes BDSM relationships. This is not a minor problem within the novel and the movie, indicated by the number of articles that have popped up in the wake of its release, describing the manner in which it portrays BDSM as something fundamentally abusive. This, in turn, perpetuates stereotypes about a community that are untrue and serve to further push it to the outskirts. For the sake of this article, however, I prefer to turn my attention to its problematic portrayal of an abusive relationship in general within the context of unequal power dynamics.
For those unfamiliar with its premise, "Fifty Shades of Grey"is about the relationship between Christian Grey, a charismatic billionaire, and Anastasia Steele, a recent college graduate who first meets Grey when she is interviewing him for an article. She is unsure of herself and of the world around her in a way that many students can empathize with deeply. Beyond that, Anastasia finds Christian to be intensely intimidating. From there, a cat-and-mouse game ensues that includes, according to the CDC’s standards for emotional abuse and sexual violence, instances of stalking, isolation and intimidation.
There are numerous points in the plot that substantiate these claims; perhaps the most alarming is the contract that Christian compels Ana to sign before they move forward in their relationship. This contract stipulates that Christian will provide financially and emotionally for Ana, taking particular care to make sure of her physical health, and Ana will then submit to any desire, fleeting or not, that Christian may have. Ana is rightfully concerned, but still finds the entire thing vaguely romantic in a truly troubling way. There is nothing romantic about Christian dictating her diet (giving her a prescribed list of foods from which to choose), stripping her of her physical autonomy by deciding that she cannot masturbate and dictating what type of birth control to use, instructing her not to confide in her closest friend and punishing her by whipping or spanking should she deviate from the terms of the contract. At one point, he does so when she simply rolls her eyes. Instances like these are not paragons of romance, nor passion, nor BDSM. These are instances of domestic abuse.
And yet, this book has sold over 100 million copies and has been translated in over 50 languages. The movie, in its opening weekend, grossed $81.6 million. Why do we, both the media and the consumers of the media, laud or at the very least accept as reasonable changes in a policy to reflect the danger of unequal power dynamics and, in the same breath, fund a franchise that is questionable on all levels?
I don’t advocate, as some men and women do, the burning of the book as a show of protest against its message. I am simply calling upon those who read it and watch the movie (and even those who don’t) to reflect upon whether or not they find its messages — implicit and explicit — troubling, and why or why not, especially in the context of what many have come to (accurately) call a “rape culture.” Ignoring "Fifty Shades of Grey"is not a solution to a problem rooted in the mentality of a population. It’s time, however, for some introspection and for that introspection to lead to reform. The question floated above is not an easy one to answer or to change the answer to, but it’s crucial to consider it in the years to come.
Kelly Hatfield is a sophomore from Medford, Mass. She can be reached at kellych@princeton.edu.
Read More
Princeton needs to be a climate justice leader — emphasis on the ‘climate,’ emphasis on the ‘justice’
Alex Norbrook and Eleanor Clemans-Cope“Princeton must not only withdraw its support from injustices, but also positively re-invest in sustainable and community-informed initiatives.”
“Princeton must not only withdraw its support from injustices, but also positively re-invest in sustainable and community-informed initiatives.”
Princeton must move towards a world-changing curriculum
Luqmaan Bamba“If we in the Orange Bubble are supposed to be taught how to be changemakers, our education should not just stop at learning about change but also extend to the tangible application of it.”
“If we in the Orange Bubble are supposed to be taught how to be changemakers, our education should not just stop at learning about change but also extend to the tangible application of it.”
Statement of solidarity with Columbia University students from Princeton faculty and staff
Guest ContributorsIn an open letter, Princeton University faculty and staff express solidarity with Columbia University and Barnard College student protestors by boycotting the universities until their demands are met.
In an open letter, Princeton University faculty and staff express solidarity with Columbia University and Barnard College student protestors by boycotting the universities until their demands are met.
