Consent in the Workplace—the Gray Zone

As a culture, we are integrating the spectacular changes of the #MeToo movement, which has brought an evolution of our thinking. We now need to update and clarify our definition of consent. Most of us would agree that predators the likes of Harvey Weinstein have no regard or respect for a woman’s consent.

But what about the gray zone of a consensual workplace affair. In a study done on dating, men said the worst thing that could happen on a date would be not getting laid. Whereas women said it would be getting raped and murdered. Women are dealing with unforeseen forces that can have irreversible ramifications to their careers, well-being, mental health and future.

Addie Collins­ Zinone was an intern, then production assistant for the Today Show. In her last month on the job she had a consensual affair with Matt Lauer. She was 23, Lauer was 43. Lauer suddenly ghosted her when the National Enquirer started asking for comment on their tryst. She left the show and “…joined the army because I …couldn’t deal with the fallout from this brief but intense relationship.” Years later as a news anchor pitching a story to Today­­ which for Zinone represented “an amazing step forward” in her career, she discovered she was persona non-grata at Today. The entire experience being singled out, previously invisible suddenly important—then ungraciously dumped and excommunicated by what could have been career advancing corporate connections, in her words, “shattered everything.”

Another more famous intern is re­framing her work experiences post #MeToo: Monica Lewinsky. In 2014, before #MeToo, Lewinsky wrote, “So often have I struggled with my own sense of agency versus victimhood….In 1998… women’s sexuality was a marker of their agency—‘owning desire.’… Sure, my boss took advantage of me, but I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship.” But in the new dawn of #MeToo Lewinsky has reassessed her experiences: “I now see how problematic it was that the two of us even got to a place where there was a question of consent. Instead, the road that led there was littered with inappropriate abuse of authority, station, and privilege.”

What are women consenting to when we consent at the workplace? Is it to be loved reciprocally, sexual gratification, some fun with a colleague? Or to be used to further a partner’s career, maintain his status, public image and reputation—even at our own obliteration?

We need to refine the discussion of workplace consent to include the intersections of youth, class, workplace status and power. In our sexist culture we are steeped in the notion that the powerful King is the ultimate catch that will improve our lives. Young females are indoctrinated to believe that by agreeing to sex with a powerful man they are exercising their right to agency in the sexual arena, and being liberated. But that same sexist culture does not teach women that often consenting to sex with a powerful man is more than that—it’s agreeing to place his needs above your own at all costs, even the truncation of your career and wellbeing.

In defining the parameters of consent, rape can’t be the only marker. Agreeing to a sexual connection in the workplace should not be the first step to being scapegoated, and professionally erased.