Daniel Handler and #MeToo

[Dante]

Before I introduce the article that publicises this issue, I'd like to direct people to the following blog post by author Gwenda Bond regarding sexual harassment policies for the children's literature community, as the lengthy comments thread is the source for much of the article's material:

#metoo #ustoo Change Starts Now: Stand Against Harassment in the YA/Kidlit Community

It's well worth using a search function to sift through the comments for mentions of Handler specifically, as that is the context which informs the lengthy article I previously mentioned:

How Will Publishing Deal With Lemony Snicket Amid #MeToo?

I should state that there is no revelatory scandal here, in the sense that I suspect many of the anecdotes will be regarded as characteristic of Mr. Handler as we know him, for better or for worse. The position is that what we already knew was already part of the problem. It's important that we become informed and reflect carefully upon our response.

Discuss.

[Violent BUN Fortuna]

I've been thinking a lot about this since I read it a few hours ago. What I will say first is that I am very pleased with the last couple of lines of Handler's response: 'And I believe the people who are talking. I am listening and willing to listen; I am learning and willing to learn.' (X) That, I think, is the correct response to allegations of sexual harassment, and I hope he practices what he is preaching and sticks to what he has said he will do.

That aside, I think a large part of the problem may be that Handler simply doesn't seem very good at understanding the appropriateness (or lack thereof) of certain comments in certain situations: that is, I don't think he always distinguishes between personal and public, social and professional. I think, because he regards himself as liberal, as a feminist, etc., he doesn't realise that there are still some things -- many things -- that are simply not acceptable for him to say. The impression I get is that because he regards himself as on the 'same side' as other feminists, because he identifies as being a part of that group, he thinks it's OK for him to say what he likes because everyone should know that he doesn't mean any harm by it. It's as if he's saying 'It's all right, I'm one of you! It doesn't matter what I say because we're on the same side!' And I think that's a problem, because the sort of demeaning sexual language which people have accused him of using has an impact, no matter who it comes from. And it contributes to a culture where women are constantly viewed as sexual objects.

I'm not sure I'm explaining my thoughts on this very well at the moment ... but essentially, I think there is a fundamental difference between talking with a close group of friends who understand each other's humour and are comfortable with each other, and talking with colleagues and strangers. I don't think Handler has always appreciated that difference. And I think he has also at times failed to recognise that just because he wouldn't mind being spoken to in a certain way, it doesn't mean that he should speak to others in that same way.  

I may be wrong, but that's the impression I get, anyway.

There was one comment from someone who said that they had met Handler a few times and thought he was a decent person. They went on to say that: 'if a former student or friend was at a conference and they contacted me and said they were being sexually harassed, and I saw that Daniel Handler was also at the conference, I’d actually try to contact Daniel and direct my friend/student to him so he could help them out, because I don’t think he’s a predator*, and I do believe that he’d be a good ally in this.' (X)
I think this is in a way the crux of the matter: I think Handler has very good intentions and ideals and he has been pleasingly vocal on a number of different social issues, including feminism. I think he believes in equality.

But I also think he can be quite ignorant as to the power of his words, and the privilege he holds. I think he needs to stop and take note of what people are saying, and I hope he learns from this and improves the way he speaks to women. Personally, I do trust him to do this. I don't believe him to be malicious or intentionally hurtful -- I simply think that from his position of privilege, he can be very ignorant, and he needs to learn how to handle his privilege better. 

In regards to the appropriateness of having him speak at his old university alongside a whistleblower and anti-workplace harassment activist, I personally don't think there is a problem. Indeed, I think he could learn from the experience. And I think he should certainly be given the chance to reflect and improve upon his past actions. Denying him a platform won't do any good: engaging him and others in a discussion about what is acceptable behaviour may do a great deal of good. 

I think that's all I have to say on the matter at the moment. I'm sorry this was quite long and perhaps somewhat tautological: I was simply trying to articulate my thoughts on the matter, which took some work. 

*It's important to note here that no one seems to have accused Handler of being a predator. 

[bear]

daniel handler called me a nerd when i met him #metoo

[gliquey]

Some of these stories seem quite small, such as the Uniball joke. Maybe these were said in poor taste - the context certainly makes them inappropriate - but I think everyone makes bad jokes and says things they regret. Certainly Handler could refrain from them, but I don't think they're very serious.

Other stories are more concerning. The "Lemony Snicket told me to go kiss a stranger" is overt sexual harassment and very uncomfortable. The watermelon joke was definitely beyond the line. I do think Handler needs to apologise, atone properly and change his behaviour, and it is good that people are coming out publicly. However, I don't these issues are serious enough to merit permanent damage to his reputation - like being banned from giving speeches - as long as there are no future reports of this type of incident.

Handler's reply struck me as unnecessarily defensive on a first read ("my books continue to be regarded, by a segment of the population, as inappropriate" in particular is Handler playing the victim). But upon a re-read, it does have some quite reassuring comments - "I sincerely, if tardily, apologize."; "And I believe the people who are talking. I am listening and willing to listen; I am learning and willing to learn." and the offer for people to contact him via email or his website. So maybe this is a good sign.

This might not have been a revelation to others but it was to me; other than the watermelon incident, which I think he atoned for sufficiently, I had never heard of any inappropriate jokes he had made in public like this. I find it very disappointing, having always been pleased that Handler is a feminist and having held up ASOUE as a feminist work (Violet, Klaus and Sunny all defy gender norms, Violet is responsible for her siblings and all are given roughly equal prominence and opportunity to save the day). (Handler is the third famous person I admired who has been implicated in #MeToo recently, after Aziz Ansari and Louis C.K. - though his actions do not compare to C.K.'s.)

[Violent BUN Fortuna]

I agree with you gliquey , that the stories vary in severity. I'm glad you also thought the Uniball one seemed quite small because personally, I didn't see anything wrong with that one, really; it wasn't really overtly sexual and was certainly subtle and not, it seems, addressed at any one person. Others, though, were far more concerning, as you say. 

It's all highly disappointing but the one thing I am not disappointed in is Handler's response. I do think he truly does listen to people when they call him out about this sort of thing. I was pleased with his response in the past to the watermelon joke; he acknowledged that the joke was racist, apologised unreservedly and helped to bring about something positive from his errors. 
I'm saddened and disappointed by this latest news, but ultimately it hasn't really changed my view of Handler; I think he is a good person who has made some severe errors in judgement and I hope he will learn from this and move forward positively. I believe him when he identifies himself as a feminist: I think he simply has not realised the impact of his words, which has been a grave mistake, and one he is right to apologise for. So long as he really does listen and learn, so long as he strives to do better, then I will be pleased. 

Also, in regards to ASOUE, I absolutely uphold it as a great example of feminism in literature. I think ASOUE highlights Handler's values and ideals, and they are very good ones to have. I simply hope he learns to make sure that he always lives up to these values.

[Hermes]

I think Violet is right and gets to the heart of the matter.

I was going to say I don't understand Quisby's comment, but on reflection I think I do.

(Yesterday for a while 667 wouldn't load, and I thought 'Oh dear, this revelation - though as Dante says, it isn't really a revelation - was so disturbing that 667 has had to close down'. I'm glad this wasn't so.)

[A comet crashing into Earth]

I did not know about any of this, apart from the watermelon incident, although I have occasionally found myself disappointed in the apparent insensitivity of things Handler has said in public. I may compose my thoughts on the matter and post them here at some later point. I also may discover that that's difficult, and not do it. Either way, I hugely admire Bun's concise formulation of thoughts in response to this, and agree intensely with the gist of it.

[Violent BUN Fortuna]

Thank you, Comet, that's very kind of you. I'm glad I managed to formulate my thoughts on the matter in a way that you appreciated. It's not an easy thing to talk about, especially when it is in relation to someone whose work is so important to all of us here, but I think it's good to talk about it and try to come to terms with our own thoughts.

[Dionysus]

I’ve been following this on Twitter for the past week or two – I’m really not sure what to make of it at all. I think there is a big difference in making a lewd comment (aimed at everyone) and sexual assault and sexual harassment. Daniel has apologized, promised to change and has offered to donate money to various organisations that will seek to empower female authors. But many won’t accept that – which begs the question: what do they want him to do? Never write another book? Never attend another literary event? Vanish off the face of the Earth?

[Violent BUN Fortuna]

I largely agree with you, Dionysus, although I think it is worth noting that sexual harassment can include 'lewd comments' -- and some of the stories recounted by various women made it clear that Handler was speaking directly to them. Such comments do constitute sexual harassment, and that should not be forgotten. That being said, I agree that there is still a big difference between the sort of remarks Handler made and sexual assault, or even more severe sexual harassment.

The remarks Handler made were crude, hurtful, and full of ignorance. But what they show is a severe lack of judgement, taste, and awareness: they do NOT show that he is an evil person, completely lacking in morals and unable to change his behaviour. They show his ignorance, but they do not show him to be worthless.
I personally think it would be far better to acknowledge the problem, point out his flaws, and having done that let him apologise, grow and change his behaviour, rather than deciding that he must never be allowed to work again, etc.
I want him to improve his behaviour, not vanish from public life. The former option is beneficial for everyone: the latter merely pulls the rug over an underlying issue. Obviously things would be different if he had assaulted anyone, but the distinction between his words and sexual assault was made very clear by those who told their stories about him. 

I'm interested, though -- can you let us know where Handler promised to donate money? I haven't seen him say that anywhere and I would be interested to read more of his response to this issue. 

[gliquey]

I agree with Violent BUN Fortuna that lewd comments are (often) sexual harassment - and in fact, I completely agree with everything else she wrote. We obviously need to distinguish Handler's actions from sexual assault (not that I have seen anyone conflating them), but it is still a serious issue. These are sustained actions over a long period of time that have made a large number of women feel very uncomfortable or upset: the stories that have been made public will only be the tip of the iceberg.

I have heard nothing about Handler donating money to charity following these latest stories. He did donate a large sum to We Need Diverse Books after the 2014 watermelon joke, but that was an issue of race and not gender, and not based on the recent news about him.

I am not an avid Twitter user but I have not yet seen anyone who wouldn't be perfectly happy with Handler continuing to be famous and publish books and have the Netflix series continue and thrive etc. as long as they knew that Handler had reformed and made amends for his actions. I have seen people criticising his apology - I did this a bit myself above - but this is because they think it shows Handler missing the point or acting defensive, and not because they would never accept any apology at all. I think this is a strawman argument we need to be careful to dispel. No-one is out to get Handler, to prove he is evil or to ruin his life. The only aim here is to get him to understand the magnitude of his actions so that in future, he won't make these troubling jokes that cause others to feel very uncomfortable.

[meinhard1]

I do worry when I see stuff like this. DH can, and I hope will,
always strive to listen and be socially aware. But I think we all know he has this big, unfiltered, somewhat crass personality and that itself won’t easily change. Some are more conducive to measured speak than others and that just isn’t him. I don’t want to sound like I’m making this to be an excuse for his behavior. He worries me, not as a person or an author, but as a subject for the spotlight. And it’s always scary when people have power over others, you hope they’ll be responsible

I see a tendency towards public shaming online and it comes across as a violent, tribalistic, free-for-all and it worries me for DH. We’re always prone to be accepting of the flaws of those we like/feel connected with (a bit of that here yes), or can meet in person and make eye contact with, but when someone’s shameful actions come to light on the impersonal internet the person becomes a label, and anything is fair game. I see these necessary conversations and feel concerned — with increased public attention or repeated behavior from Handler it could destroy his reputation, which would be pretty sad to see.

It was Lemony Snicket who first introduced me to the idea “people aren't either wicked or noble. They're like chef's salads, with good things and bad things chopped and mixed together in a vinaigrette of confusion and conflict.” I can reconcile an idea of DH having flaws. Existing within a larger culture that is, yes, sexist, racist and more ... I can certainly recognized that responsibly navigating social waters is dicey, and that we’ve all had moments that make us cringe in retrospect. But still there has to be standards for oneself and others. I hope there is a real earnest effort on his part to understand and deal with these apparent issues.

[Grace]

Feb 25, 2018 1:47:20 GMT -5 meinhard1 said:

I see a tendency towards public shaming online and it comes across as a violent, tribalistic, free-for-all and it worries me for DH.

So I want to go on the record as saying that most public shaming for sexual misconduct is a public service and a good use of peer pressure. Especially because most sexual assault of every form goes unreported and unpunished. A little public shame is a small price to pay. And Daniel Handler will, most likely, be fine.

This is definitely a bummer but I was relieved that nothing physical occurred and things weren't worse after reading the title of this thread. Sad that "just" sexual harassment is a relief these days but there you go.

[meinhard1]

Feb 27, 2018 8:58:41 GMT -5 Grace said:

Feb 25, 2018 1:47:20 GMT -5 meinhard1 said:

I see a tendency towards public shaming online and it comes across as a violent, tribalistic, free-for-all and it worries me for DH.

So I want to go on the record as saying that most public shaming for sexual misconduct is a public service and a good use of peer pressure. Especially because most sexual assault of every form goes unreported and unpunished. A little public shame is a small price to pay. And Daniel Handler will, most likely, be fine.

This is definitely a bummer but I was relieved that nothing physical occurred and things weren't worse after reading the title of this thread. Sad that "just" sexual harassment is a relief these days but there you go.

Pragmatically I’m not sure I can argue with you. Were there more accountability in the social and professional settings where these abuses occur, we wouldn’t need these things to blow up harshly online to send a message. I will echo you that the achievements of MeToo are a greater good, that any cruelty the movement shows is an intentionally vocal response to a greater and largely silent cruelty.

Still the online public shaming comes across as cruel to me, that’s what I’m mean here. I don’t enjoy seeing people disparaged, vilified. I do like seeing that some want to engage in a discussion with Handler.
The second article in the OP mentions Allie Bruce sharing Handlers “How to Talk About Sex” discussion on Twitter, what she says: "What you will hear, if you listen, is two cis men who speak the language of liberalism, progressivism, and feminism *perfectly* and are capitalizing on it. Using it to promote themselves and their books."
How she can know what they intend?

If Handler or anyone shows a genuine desire to understand their actions, and learn from them, then that’s preferable to assuming they’re wicked, “not one of us” and don’t belong.

[Grace]

Feb 27, 2018 16:06:33 GMT -5 meinhard1 said:

Still the online public shaming comes across as cruel to me, that’s what I’m mean here. I don’t enjoy seeing people disparaged, vilified. I do like seeing that some want to engage in a discussion with Handler.
The second article in the OP mentions Allie Bruce sharing Handlers “How to Talk About Sex” discussion on Twitter, what she says: "What you will hear, if you listen, is two cis men who speak the language of liberalism, progressivism, and feminism *perfectly* and are capitalizing on it. Using it to promote themselves and their books."
How she can know what they intend?

So to answer your last question, of course she can't know what they intend, but she (and we) can only judge by their actions, not their intentions. They do speak those languages perfectly. They are selling books, that's what they do. She's pointing out the difficulties there, most of which are not even their fault. But it raises the bigger and more uncomfortable issue of feminism (and other forms of progressivism) as social currency within an inevitably capitalist framework.

To get to the main point, I think what a lot of people are picking up on is a sort of disproportionate response to something that is definitely ickleed up. But it is a bizarre experience to see this kind of vitriol directed at off-color comments (some more worrisome than others) when cartoon villain rapists get light jail time or none at all (Cosby, Polanski, Brock Turner, etc). It can be hard to grapple with. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the reactions that we perceive as over the top might have more to do with fatphobia and conventions of physical attractiveness. Furthermore, an important part of sexual harassment is abuse of power. There are people here who try to frame these interactions that way and it doesn't really work. Handler is famous, yes, but people laughing at your joke because you're a big deal is not abuse of power. It's not great. That's true. But pages on pages of discussion about off-color jokes don't belong in the current #metoo conversation. Call him out, get him to stop, and then fry some bigger fish.