Believe her - even if she's saying #NotMe instead of #MeToo

It is outstanding that we are having conversations about sexual assault, harassment, power imbalances, consent, rape culture, privilege, and many of the complex issues that go into improving relations between people regardless of who they are. The conversations are long overdue. It is crucial that we are beginning to understand that sexual assault can encompass a lot more than a stranger-rape with a weapon. We must listen to the stories of those who have experienced sexual misconduct, and believe their assessments. As I've written before, we must also allow people to grow and learn things about their conduct that they might not have realized when eyeball deep in the culture that has evolved so much. Finally, we must believe the stories of those who continue to insist that they were not victimized.

In a Vanity Fair piece she wrote four years ago, Monica Lewinsky discusses how she was victimized in the aftermath of the publicity surrounding her affair with Bill Clinton. I had not thought about her situation in those terms when I read the piece, and I was ashamed to recognize my complicity in her humiliation. It is clear that in the writing of that piece, she sees two distinct phases in the Clinton situation: the relationship itself, and the aftermath. I think it's pretty undeniable that her treatment in the aftermath was unforgivable and anti-feminist.

This piece, written in 1998, is painfully true about feminists' complicated but ultimately regrettable relationship with Bill Clinton. The author was prescient about Hillary Clinton's eventual run for president. We really should have demanded that Bill Clinton acknowledge his shitty past behavior, apologized, and contributed a bunch of money to a relevant and reputable organization. I believe both Clintons have grown since his presidency, and I think both ought to publicly acknowledge that. There is no doubt, in retrospect, that Bill Clinton was a very very big part of the culture that we've learned to condemn.

Recently, Ms. Lewinsky wrote a new piece reflecting on her experience in the age of #MeToo. It deeply provokes thought about the wider implications of the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal and its effect on the nation, as well as its role in the expanding discussion of sexual misconduct. Ms. Lewinsky also reflects on her involvement with Bill Clinton in light of the expanded discussion abuse of power as a manner of sexual assault. I'm sure there are already thousands of comments in every type of media saying ugly things about her, and probably, I hope, there are a lot of supportive comments as well.

I appreciate Ms. Lewinsky's story. It's an extremely important part of the conversation, and I firmly believe that her story is hers, and only hers, to tell. And my story is mine.

Around the same time that the scandal was coming out, I engaged in one of the classically imbalanced relationships: Student/teacher (about twenty years my senior).

I took his class in the first place because I'd heard he was hot. He was, and we had chemistry. I was well over 18 and out of his class before we ever did anything physical. We continued to be casually involved, primarily long-distance, for several months after I graduated. It wouldn't have worked out long-term, but I look back on the relationship fondly.

Recently, someone I trust, whose opinion I value, and who was one of the only ones who knew about our relationship at the time, suggested that my situation was exploitative. I reminded her that I threw myself at him, and she noted that he didn't have to say yes. While that is true, I would have been very disappointed if he hadn't.

There is certainly an argument to be made that a victim of this type of exploitation may not recognize her own victimhood. In the 2014 piece, Lewinsky herself emphasized that the relationship itself was consensual. In the piece she wrote last week, she acknowledges the "implications of the power differentials that were so vast between a president and a White House intern." She also is is "beginning to to entertain the notion that in such a circumstance the idea of consent might well be rendered moot. (Although power imbalances - and the ability to abuse them - do exist even when the sex has been consensual.)"

Consent might well be rendered moot between a president and a White House intern, or between a teacher and a student, or between a supervisor and subordinate. Age, maturity, experience, power imbalances, misogyny, agency, and physical and emotional consequences are just a few of the things that must join attraction in one's consideration of whether to engage in any sexual relationship. One size does not fit all. It's crucial to talk about whether and how such factors create an inherently abusive, exploitative, or otherwise negative relationship, even where there is consent.

But I wasn't exploited or victimized, and I won't be told that I was.

I will never ever use the phrases "gone too far" or "out of hand" about any #MeToo story. Every person's story is their own. "Ban it" is generally a poorly-thought-out strategy to address a problem, and that's no exception when it comes to attempts to categorically prohibit certain types of relationships.

Instead, relationships in the context of certain types of relationships should be entered into with caution. The couple should be honest about the issues that are likely to raise eyebrows and discuss them in depth. The parties should check in with themselves and each other often to ensure that everyone is still on board and comfortable, and to the extent possible, remove the conflicts. And then go on in privacy, which we really don't have enough of anymore.