Skip to main content

Sexual harassment, social change communication, and the power to change

The recent communication for social change intervention to address sexual violence on a University campus created by Ms. Monica Baey, a student of Communication, reflects some of the best practices of communication for social change. In her incredibly brave articulation of her experience with sexual harassment, Ms. Baey creates a simple message. A message that draws attention to her experience, and in doing so, clearly communicates the broader culture of sexual violence.

Her narrative points to specific structural sites and spaces (police, university) where justice is typically carried out and articulates clear demands for change.  Most importantly, her creative uses of digital communication bypass the traditional channels of communication. Her experience shared on Instagram through powerful visual storytelling, circulates in accelerated networks of sharing, and finds its way into the mainstream media.

The first story on her experience appears on an international channel (South China Morning Post) and then gets picked up by the traditional mainstream channels in Singapore. This is significant as the relationship with international media ensures that narrative control is maintained by Ms. Baey.

In subsequent press statements, the University has positively responded to the challenge, noting the formation of a committee to look at disciplinary practices. The Minister of Education in Singapore has posted on his Facebook suggesting the need for re-looking at the punishment for sexual violence. These are very good starting points for conversations on transforming the broader culture.

In 2017, based on inputs from students, staff, and faculty members on the challenges they experienced with sexual harassment, CARE placed sexual violence as a key agenda for the Center to address through our social change communication work.

The Center collaborated with the veteran Singapore activist, and the Center's activist-in-residence, Braema Mathi, to put together a panel addressing sexual violence on University campuses. The panel was attended by Braema Mathi, Gloria James-Civetta, and Jolene Tan, AWARE's Head of Research.. Attended by staff and students, it highlighted the culture of patriarchy that circulates violence, specific strategies for addressing sexual harassment and the work of social change communication to address sexual violence on University campuses.

The collaboration with Ms. Mathi also resulted in a white paper titled "Sexual violence on University campuses: Communication Interventions." The white paper highlighted strategies for universities to address in building communication interventions, as well as strategies for change advocates to adopt in bringing about changes in cultures of sexual violence in Universities.

Among the strategies for Universities to adopt were the following recommendations:

  1. Advocating to build gender just Universities. Building gender justice across the University reflects a broad commitment to justice through education, prevention interventions, policy formation, disciplinary processes, and evaluation mechanisms. Continual and democratic evaluation are key components, with transparency in how such evaluations are implemented, how they are taken into account, and how their findings are disseminated. 
  2. Advocating to build internal University structures for addressing sexual violence. These University structures may be in the form of a Unit for Addressing Sexual Harassment or a Center for Preventing, Reporting, and Remedying Sexual Violence. Given the tendency of power to accumulate around structures, such a Unit should be explicitly represented by elected faculty, staff, and students on a rotating basis. Such a Unit must be completed by explicit policies on addressing sexual harassment and sexual violence. Given the tendency of power to concentrate and reproduce itself, the representation to a unit or committee must be democratic, ideally through a transparent election process.
  3.  Developing clear standards of communication. Clearly operationalizing sexual violence, defining it, and building two way communication processes around the articulation of sexual harassment are key. In defining the standards of communication and definition, the voices of students, staff, and faculty are key. Also, developing clear messages around the definition and forms of sexual violence is integral to transforming cultures of sexual violence.
  4. Developing mechanisms of protection of targets who report. Sexual violence is embedded in networks and relationships of power. Therefore, it is critical that frameworks be developed for protecting the identities of those that experience sexual violence. Building networks of solidarity is central to supporting individuals that experience sexual violence, including access to counseling, support networks, and institutional resources for navigating the experience.
  5. Developing cultures of witnessing. Bystander programs, programs for reporting acts of sexual violence are key and effective resources in countering sexual violence. While such programs may be embedded within Universities, ensuring they have bridges outside, such as with gender-based civil society groups is key.
In addition, the white paper outlines effective strategies for communication for social change, including building communication infrastructures for voices of individuals experiencing sexual violence, networking with various movements and groups outside the University to sustain change, creating messages that would stand out and draw attention to the culture of sexual violence, ensuring that the demands are clear and point to specific elements of structures that need to change, deploying disruptive communication channels outside of the traditional University channels, and developing reflexive practices that continually interrogate the formation and accumulation of power.

These principles of social change communication were well reflected in the "Social change communication" modules taught by Dr. Ee Lyn Tan in 2017-2018, where a student group developed strategies for advocacy and social change communication in addressing sexual violence. Other teachers of social change communication Asha Pandi, Satveer Kaur, Anuradha Rao, Dazzelyn Zapata, Afreen Azim, and Raksha Mahtani have worked with students on a wide range of projects of social change communication, drawing on their work at CARE. A number of these projects have directly addressed communication strategies for social change addressing sexual violence.

It is encouraging to witness how an effort of social change communication, emerging from an individual, with the courage to articulate her experience emerges as the basis for broader social change. Movements, we are taught by Ms. Baey, and by the #metoo movement, often emerge from individuals making the call for justice. Our students, the millenial generation, are the face of change, often through their deployment of communication that disrupts. Sustaining the change process is the key to cultural transformation. In sustaining the change process, what is critical to explore is how a change process retains the transformative space, challenging the tendency of power to co-opt it.



Popular posts from this blog

Zionist hate mongering, the race/terror trope, and the Free Speech Union: Part 1

March 15, 2019. It was a day of terror. Unleashed by a white supremacist far-right terrorist. Driven by hate for brown people. Driven by Islamophobic hate. Earlier in the day, I had come across a hate-based hit piece targeting me, alongside other academics, the University of Auckland academic Professor Nicholas Rowe , Professor Richard Jackson at Otago University, Professor Kevin P Clements at Otago University, Dr. Rose Martin from University of Auckland and Dr. Nigel Parsons at Massey University.  Titled, "More extremists in New Zealand Universities," the article threw in the labels "terror sympathisers" and "extremist views." Written by one David Cumin and hosted on the website of the Israel Institute of New Zealand, the article sought to create outrage that academics critical of Israeli settler colonialism and apartheid are actually employed by universities in New Zealand. Figure 1: The web post written by David Cumin on the site of Israel Institute

Whiteness, NCA, and Distinguished Scholars

In a post made in response to the changes to how my discipline operates made by the Executive Committee of the largest organization of the discipline, the National Communication Association (NCA), one of the editors of a disciplinary journal Rhetoric and Public Affairs (RPA), Professor Martin J. Medhurst, a Distinguished Scholar of the discipline, calls out what he sees as the threat of identity (see below for his full piece published in the journal that he has edited for 20+ years, with 2019 SJR score of 0.27). In what he notes is a threat to the "scholarly merit" of the discipline, Professor Medhurst sets up a caricature of what he calls "identity." In his rhetorical construction of the struggles the NCA has faced over the years to find Distinguished Scholars of colour, he shares with us the facts. So let's look at the facts presented by this rhetor. It turns out, as a member of the Distinguished Scholar community of the NCA, Mr. Medhurst has problems wit

Disinformation, Zionist propaganda, and free speech: Far right cancel culture

Thursday October 12, 2023. The settler colonial occupation had unleashed its infrastructure of violence over the Palestinian people over a period of five days. Gaza was being indiscriminately bombarded, with mass civilian casualties that Amnesty International noted " must be investigated as war crimes ." At 3:32 p.m., my office phone rang. I was occupied and the call went to the voicemail. "Dutta, you are a murderous, f***ing, racist c***. Go back to where you belong...I will see to your termination in New Zealand." A couple of hours before that, an email had gone out from the Zionist Dane Giraud to the email listserv of the Free Speech Union, performed as a supposed apology for attacking my academic freedom. In the email, Giraud referred to my earlier b log post on the interlinkages between far-right Zionism, attacks on academic freedom, and the free speech union, noting how he had been enraged by the following statement on my blog: "I was therefore not surpri