Misogyny in progressive clothing

People in lefty spaces hurt other people all the time. They hurt people who are supposed to be their collaborators and co-conspirators. They hurt people that their efforts are supposed to uplift and protect. They hurt family members and romantic partners. They hurt them with their hate and their violence. And we do ourselves no favors when we do not acknowledge that harm. Particularly when the perpetrators hide behind their progressive bonafides, using their public personas as a shield for their private aggressions.

To be sure, the violence and hate is way more extreme in extremist groups. After all, “our” side isn’t waging a war against immigrants or shooting them in the streets. Our side didn’t overturn abortion or slash Medicaid funding or do the countless other things that have caused suffering and death here and abroad.

But that doesn’t mean “our” side shouldn’t be held accountable for hurting people. We’ve given free passes to too many people for way too many years. Too many have used their positionality on the correct side of the political spectrum as a blanket alibi for sexual violence and harassment. Buoyed by those with powerful voices in politics or the media, they grant themselves blanket immunity from their misogyny. And their progressive supporters further thicken those walls of protection through their minimization or outright refusal to acknowledge the indiscretions of their anointed candidates.

Enter Graham Platner.

All this was on full display these past weeks with the Platner debacle. Lots has already been written about the implosion of this campaign. For this post I want to focus on the sexual violence that too often hides behind a progressive public persona. I want to talk about whether women truly get to be safe in lefty spaces. And I want to challenge us to do better.

Given that you couldn consume any news this past week without being awash in Graham Platner updates, I am sure you know the basics. A senate candidate with a weak explanation for his Nazi tattoo (really he wasn’t curious to know what was inked on his body for decades?) has allegations about poor treatment of women rolling out as fast as his endorsements. But in spite of the tattoo and the stream of stories about his harassment and abuse of women, those endorsements keep coming. High profile men who are themselves lefty pundits and influencers keep supporting him, and they also tell us that his awful treatment of women is not disqualifying. That we women are overreacting. I am a former advocate for survivors of domestic and sexual there are very few things I hate more than being told I am overreacting about violence against women. Stephen King went biblical and Jon Favreau of Pod Save America said the algorithm was to blame, not the abusive behavior. Supposed progressive journalist Ryan Grim went straight to the age old trope of blaming the victim. Political commentator Matt Stoller resorted to misogyny himself when he called Platner’s campaign “a rejection of Dem HR lady politics”. A lefty candidate defended by well known lefty male voices who don’t seem to understand that progressive politics must include the safety of women. And to be clear, minimizing the abuse of women is unto itself a form of violence against women.

To make matters worse, news broke this past week that exposed even more layers of sexual violence that permeated the Platner campaign. Daniel Moraff, who both helped recruit Platner and served as a top strategist, was barred from Congresswoman Summer Lee’s 2022 congressional campaign after she received multiple complaints of sexual misconduct involving him. This report outlines the history of Moraff’s forced separation from the Lee campaign and presents the question: was the lack of vetting around Platner’s past relationships influenced by Moraff’s own history of sexual harassment? And of course, we can’t let Senator Bernie Sanders off the hook either. Many will well remember that Sanders’ 2016 campaign was rife with accusations of sexual harassment and differential treatment of female staffers. So much so that Sanders himself issued a weak apology, saying: "I certainly apologize to any woman who felt that she was not treated appropriately, and of course, if I run, we will do better next time”. This non-apology was notable for Sanders declining to take any responsibility for the sexual harassment and mistreatment in the campaign he led, and has aged even more poorly in light of his role championing someone with such a great amount of misogynistic baggage.

Could Daniel Moraff and Bernie Sanders have been trusted to fully explore and vet a male candidate’s history with women? Or really the question should be, did they care to even try?

We on the left have spent a lot of time calling out Trump’s serial abuse of women, the profound injustice of the suppression of the Epstein files, the violence of the overturning of Roe, and the list goes on. And we should vociferously call all those things out. But being on the left side of the political spectrum doesn’t give you license to abuse women in your families or your campaign staff. You don’t get to talk about liberation and equality in your public speech and then commit or condone the abuse of women in your private interactions.

Or to put it more bluntly: stop running around talking about revolution and then treating women like shit. We’ve had it. We see it. And we want it to stop.

I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that this entire essay could be rewritten to reflect the pervasive racism amongst white people in progressive spaces. Classism as well. I don’t understand how anything can be considered progressive when the progress doesn’t include safety and voices of those who have been most marginalized.

And speaking of progressive, I will end with a confession. I’ve long struggled with whether to label myself as progressive, and the Platner implosion helped clarify my conflicting feelings on this. The willingness of too many progressive candidates and pundits to accept the mistreatment of women in their ranks — along with other forms of hate and oppression — is feeling impossible for me to ignore. I also cannot ignore the progressives who enable it by minimizing it in service to getting a candidate elected. Ultimately, my politics are safety. I want to know how your policies build safety for the people of this country. I want to understand how you plan to ensure that people’s basic needs are met, because you can’t have safety without those concrete resources. And I also want to know if you live the ideals of safety in your own life: personally and professionally. I want to support candidates who don’t just talk the talk but also walk through the world in a way that upholds the rights and dignity of those closest to them. This time last year I wrote an essay about how abusers make bad leaders and I certainly wish that was more widely accepted as a yardstick for potential candidates.

People rail against litmus tests, but I for sure have one. It’s safety. And when candidates engage in behaviors that make people less safe, we should call that out. Even the candidates on our side. No more hiding harassment and violence behind progressive platforms. No more enabling or minimizing. Enough.