Women’s March organizer accused of covering up sex abuse https://t.co/qqHAG2nDg9 pic.twitter.com/5szxmO8cDv
— New York Post (@nypost) December 18, 2017
The #MeToo movement has been a net force for good, letting men know they can no longer easily get away with sexual harassment—especially in the workplace or in a power relationship. It also carries the mantra “believe the woman.” I don’t agree with that tactic in general, but when several women have consilient stories about a man’s behavior (the prime examples being Matt Lauer and Harvey Weinstein), their accusations gain considerable credibility. But what do you do when a woman is accused of enabling, ignoring, or covering up sexual abuse of another woman? So far that’s a rarity.
Yet that’s what’s happening with Linda Sarsour, the Muslim activist and co-chair of the Women’s March on Washington. I’ve often criticized her for hiding her real agenda, which I see as anti-Semitic, pro-sharia, pro-Islamist, and anti-feminist. She is, in my view, a grifter whose ultimate aim is not by any means reform of Islam or integration of Muslims into American society, but rather personal fame and political power. (She aspires, as I recall, to sit in Congress). I have predicted that her true character will eventually become evident, as she has a hard time repressing her ambition and emotions. And this may be what is happening now.
This week, several sites, including Fox News, the Daily Caller, The New York Post, The Washington Times, Conatus News, and Newsweek, all report that Sarsour is accused of covering up a man’s sexual abuse of one of her employees when Sarsour was executive director of the Arab American Association of New York eight years ago.
The excerpt below is from the Post (all these stories appear to trace back to the Daily Caller, except for the one from Conatus News, which independently interviewed the alleged victim). And yes, I know the Daily Caller is a right-wing site, but that doesn’t mean we should completely ignore what they say.
Asmi Fathelbab told the blog The Daily Caller that a man [Majed Seif] repeatedly rubbed his crotch on her while she worked for the association under Sarsour in 2009.
But when Fathelbab reported the abuse, Sarsour — a self-proclaimed feminist and co-founder of the Women’s March organization — fat-shamed the woman and threatened to blacklist her from political jobs, the woman told the website.
“She oversaw an environment unsafe and abusive to women,” said Fathelbab. “Women who put [Sarsour] on a pedestal for women’s rights and empowerment deserve to know how she really treats us.”
Fathelbab took a contract gig with the association in 2009 and claims she was repeatedly accosted by a man who lived in the same Bay Ridge building as the group’s office.
“He would pin me against the wall and rub his crotch on me,” she told the Caller.
“It was disgusting… You have no idea what it was like to stand up and feel that behind you.”
But Sarsour called her a “liar” when Fathelbab reported it and told her “something like this didn’t happen to women who looked like me,” Fathelbab charged, clarifying on Twitter that the the rebuff was a dig at her weight.
From Conatus News:
Fathelbab told the Daily Caller that she would scream at the top of her lungs during the assaults. She told Conatus News that Sarsour heard the screams.
“Oh, she heard me! She heard me and she kind of lost it one day because I apparently interrupted a very important news interview she was having in her office, because they heard me screaming and wanted to know what happened.”
Fathelbab said that after completing her Americorp contract with the Arab American Association, Sarsour had her fired from later jobs.
And from the Daily Caller:
According to Fathelbab, Sarsour threatened legal and professional damage if she went public with the sexual assault claims.
“She told me he had the right to sue me for false claims,” Asmi recalls, adding that the assaulter allegedly “had the right to be anywhere in the building he wanted.”
Desperate after multiple dismissals by Sarsour, the distraught employee says she went to the president of the board of directors, Ahmed Jaber.
“Jaber told me my stalker was a ‘God-fearing man’ who was ‘always at the Mosque,’ so he wouldn’t do something like that,” Fathelbab claims. “He wanted to make it loud and clear this guy was a good Muslim and I was a bad Muslim for “complaining.”
. . . “She [Sarsour] told me I’d never work in NYC ever again for as long as she lived,” Asmi says. “She’s kept her word. She had me fired from other jobs when she found out where I worked. She has kept me from obtaining any sort of steady employment for almost a decade.”
Here’s a bit of corroboration, though it’s neither a second woman assaulted nor an eyewitness account of Fathelhab’s assault, but it does describe Sarsour’s behavior in light of a harassment claim:
Two people who knew Fathelbab during her time at the Arab American Association spoke with The DC on condition of anonymity. Both corroborate her story, recalling that Asmi would return “emotionally distressed and in a panic” from work, often describing it as an “unsafe” work environment.
. . .Another New York political operative, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, claims that Sarsour was “militant against other women” at the Association. This operative, who has worked for over 12 years with the Arab American Association, says they remember Asmi and witnessed her getting harassed in the building. [JAC: It’s not clear whether this refers to Seif’s alleged sexual harassment of Faithalbab or to other women, including Sarsour, fat-shaming her.]
“They made it about her [Fathelbab’s] weight, saying she was not attractive enough to be harassed and then swept it under the rug,” the source said. “It was Linda Sarsour, Ahmad Jaber and Habib Joudeh who took care of it.” Habib Joudeh is the vice president of the Arab American Association of New York.
The Daily Caller contacted Sarsour, the Women’s March Organization, Majed Seif and, and the Arab American Association, but none had a comment, nor even a denial.
Well, we have corroboration of a sort from a few others. If this were a man, he’d have been disgraced already, but Sarsour, a self-described feminist Muslim, is also a Teflon activist. My prediction: she will deny it (the “no comment” stance is unlikely to last indefinitely) and nothing will happen to her. It is of course possible that Fathelbab is lying and Sarsour did no wrong (in that case, you must discard the “believe the woman” trope). But if Sarsour is pressed to respond, it will be interesting to see what strategy she uses, as her career plans require that she come out clean. As Grania said, “I don’t know why anyone is surprised. Sarsour is a religious zealot, not a feminist.”
Still, we know that much of the Left will forgive Sarsour anything—including praising terrorists and murderers—because she’s what the New York Times called, in an risibly positive article, “a Brooklyn homegirl in a hijab.” Even if the accusation of sexual misconduct and coverup proves to be true, I’m betting that the usual subgroup of Western feminists will stick by Sarsour. This will be an interesting test for Western feminists, once again pitting one oppressed person (the putative victim) against another (the hijabi Brooklyn homegirl).
h/t: Orli
If it can be documented that Sarsour tried to ruin her career, not only would that be grounds in itself for a lawsuit but might be evidence in favor of Fathelbab’s claims
I think the more important issue is: if we aren’t requiring documentation before believing the women victims in other cases, we shouldn’t require documentation before believing Ms. Fathelbab’s here.
I’m frankly okay with the ‘court of public opinion’ having a lower standard than a criminal or civil court. Meaning: while I recognize that Ms. Fatelbab’s testimony alone shouldn’t be sufficient to charge someone with a crime or cause them to pay hefty sums in civil damages, I think it’s perfectly acceptable to read such reports and conclude ‘I’m not going to recommend people work here, give to this organization, or otherwise involve themselves with it.’
IMO cases like this are exactly why we should be fighting against overuse and over-extension of words like “unsafe.” Reading this caused an immediate ‘skeptical flinch’ in me; I believe the story less because her word choice is alt-left. Yet, this is exactly the sort of workplace that should be labeled unsafe, in the traditional sense. So IMO here we have a case of a word being so overused, that when we have a case where it would be really useful and appropriate, using it results in undermining the important point of the story.
We really need to start vocally objecting to the alt-left’s usage of these terms. They’re creating the linguistic equivalent of a ‘boy who cried wolf’ phenomenon.
Why does this fail to surprise me?
(At least Ms Sarsour refrained from cheap shots like ‘Fat Baby from Hell’, for ‘Fathelbab’, only nickies can sink that low).
I agree with your prediction; absolutely nothing will happen. It will be ignored just as the fundamental misogyny of Islam is ignored.
Much of this movement isn’t about sexual harassment at all. It’s about power, who has it and who can have it taken away, provided they’re male, of course. Truth is an entirely orthogonal motive.
I agree. Some days I think ignored would be a best case scenario too. I just found this disturbing tidbit today for example.
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/08/uk-police-warn-man-to-stop-criticizing-islam-on-facebook
No. The fact is most sexual harassers are men, which is why they’re the ones getting exposec. Abuse victims have had to keep silent for most of history because those abusing them have the power, and it’s usually men who have the power.
This is not some conspiracy against men. We’ve reached a point in history where those in power can no longer hide behind their privilege, and it’s about time.
I agree in principle, but we should be clear about the meaning of sexual harassement. Unfortunately the #MeToo movement is currently lumping creeps and awkward situations with forceful penetration.
If there was any consistency Linda Sarsour would be down already, since others (men) have been down for less than this. I accept the asymmetry (a sexual predator is almost surely a male for obvious reasons) but we should take this as a chance to redefine the rules without reverting to a Victorian structure with women seen as hopeless eternal victims.
Seems to be some confusion in your comments, at least to me. Linda Sarsour is not the sexual harasser here. She is the person protecting sexual harassment in the workforce and that is and has always been the problem in attacking this issue. Whether she is male or female makes no difference at all.
And this is how she will escape any consequences.
Isn’t she? She might not be responsible for the sexual advances, but if the accusations are true she is responsible for the harassment part. And that’s the objectionable part isn’t it? I think that is what David is getting at. Maybe no-one should ever make a crude pass, and we should all be Ronald Colman, but surely the real harm isn’t the pass, it’s the retaliation, and the implicit threat a pass can sometimes carry when retaliation is known and allowed. And that is precisely the complaint about Sarsour. She helped create the conditions under which some men were allowed to punish women for not submitting.
She is responsible for the environment, the culture, the enabler of the sexual harassment. There is a distinction. I do not say she is any better but the sexual harasser is still the person who did it to the victim. In your world we should simply go out and convict nearly every company in existence because they allow sexual harassment to go on. It is a little bit like going after the cops for allowing crime to take place isn’t it. The person doing the crime is called the perpetrator for a reason you know.
In the real world of sexual harassment most private companies will see no punishment for allowing sexual harassment to go on. Look at the Air Force Academy at the current time or the military in general. Sexual harassment is going on all the time and the assaults are going unpunished because they do not know how to deal with it. They just cover it up.
“In your world we should simply go out and convict nearly every company in existence because they allow sexual harassment to go on.”
Huh? She allegedly took active steps, such as threats, and insulting her to her employers. That’s not remotely just a passive failure to act.
Randall – if the accusations are true (!), she was in a position to stop the harassment but didn’t. If a company (or the police) did that you bet they’d be held responsible.
But she doesn’t have dangly bits, so she’ll get a pass on this from the usual suspects. For the reasons YOU cite.
Did I say she should not be held responsible? If I did, please show me. If you just go back and look at my first response and who it was too, you will see that he was essentually calling her the sexual harasser. WRONG
Either you and others do not read well or you just have your agenda and press on even if you are wrong. You show me any company who is being penalized for one or more of their employees doing sexual harassment. NBC, FOX, any company. They knew it was happening but what did they do. Hell, Fox paid off the person being harassed to get rid of them.
My apologies, Randall, but sitting here in the cheap seats it did look like your arguments were trying to excuse her; if companies get away with it (they do, but that doesn’t undermine the idea that they should be held responsible) then she should too.
That is not what you are saying…then ok. I apologize for misreading you. I agree that it is wrong that so many companies do get away with it – but Sarsour will too. In her case she will get away with it because she is a she, not for any of the reasons companies do.
This is how the apologists on the left work. Black racists get a pass when the victims are white (or sometimes when they are Asian). Muslim misogyny get a pass when…well… ALL the time. Trans/queer/gay/lesbian/whateverthehellelse get a pass on cis-het hate. And women get a pass on misandry because the target is men.
(These comments are necessarily directed at you because I have no way of knowing whether they need to be, but they are things that need to be said.)
Yes, but you also need to recognize that there are plenty of situations where women (and men too) are unable to stick up for themselves and the most common of these is when abuse is coupled with power,
And it is not okay to practice various forms of harassment as long as you don’t actually rape a woman.
Men see complimenting a woman on her appearance, for example, as no big deal. But women should not have to put up with constant comments about their appearance, It may seem a small thing to men, especially if they themselves have only done it once. But it’s draining when it’s a constant barrage and you’re trying to be taken seriously, knowing you’re smarter than most or all of the men in the room but not seen that way because they’d rather look at your boobs or whatever.
In the last few days Director Peter Jackson has admitted that he decided not to give roles to two actresses in LOTR trilogy because Harvey Weinstein told him they were a nightmare to work with. Both were women who stood up to Weinstein. They’ve since gone on to have good careers, but the start of their careers was delayed and that may have been enough to derail another actress.
As I said above, the allegations against Sarsour should be looked into, and given that they appear credible and there is corroboration, she should already be having to answer some pretty tough questions. But it is not the fault of all women that she is so far getting away with what may have been bad behaviour.
Thanks, Heather, and well said as always.
I second that.
“The fact is most sexual harassers are men…”
This is true, of course, but doesn’t gainsay what I wrote.
I do think overall the new attention to harassment is good. I’ve said it here before that I think it will serve us well, much like the cultural change that occurred in the US surrounding drinking and driving – something that was once tolerated, even winked at, is no longer.
But make no mistake – many are NOT motivated by a desire to see wrongs righted. Or at least it is not the sole motive. There are scores to settle and power to usurp. Many lives and careers will be undone, some justly. It’s the new normal.
As typical of these discussions, they go nowhere. The Metoo and related movements will play themselves out and, in the end, society will be the better for it even with all the ruined lives in their wake.
I say you are dead wrong. This is simply the beginning of calling out something that has gone on for decades. From now on, lots of people will pay and yes…just like all things, there will be a few who get hung unjustly. But if you think this thing is going to blow over, you must have just been made aware of it. As I have said before, had lots of experience with this back in the late 70s and 80s in the company where I worked. A few companies have taken the correct steps to just about eliminate this in the workplace but many have not. Read about this in the EEOC and note that this has been well defined for years. The only difference going on now is that people are speaking up.
I didn’t say it will “blow over” – in fact I explicitly said it won’t (and hope so too – also made explicit). Now it is you who is misreading a comment here.
However, I won’t impugn your motives.
Let me review your words for you then, if you are talking to me.
The MeToo and related movements will play themselves out and in the end society will be better for it. If that is not (blowing over) then what should we call it.
Last comment – “play itself out” doesn’t mean “blow over”. It is not going away – it is an unstoppable cultural force now -for good or ill- and it has some way to go before our culture settles in to a new paradigm. I was explicit about the sea-change in our culture it will provoke; “..it will serve us well, much like the cultural change that occurred in the US surrounding drinking and driving…”. This is a good thing.
By the time it has run its course many lives will be ruined, some justly so, some not, and many in the gray areas between justice and a witch hunt.
I get it, Randall, you don’t like me or my opinions, but you are better than this misreading.
I like you just fine. It is only some of your thought I disagree with. Your comments about lives ruined or for good or ill simply tells me you may be off course on this subject. Do not think these high profile cases are where sexual harassment lives in reality. Yes, they get all the press and the coverage is big, but this is but a dot on the map. The overwhelming condition of sexual harassment goes on daily in the thousands of small, medium and large companies across the country. There is nothing in the news about this and it will never be covered much at all. Lets try not to cement our opinions and ideas about sexual harassment based on these few high profile and in the headline examples.
There are always people who make accusations that aren’t true, just like they do for any other crime. Somehow in this situation, some men (and I don’t think you are one of them so don’t take this personally) are using that minority as an excuse to attack all women, or an excuse to ignore the problem.
The problem is much worse than most men realize. Every woman, at a minimum, knows someone who has been abused. Few men (think they) know an abuser.
This is a talking point I have seen tossed up elsewhere. But women abuse too, and a recent study found 6% admitting they do. So do you know a dozen women? If you do chances are you know an abuser but don’t know she is one. The point is that when men say they don’t know any abuser it isn’t because they are blind or stupid or covering up any more than you are. It’s that abusers keep it secret.
I do know female abusers because I’ve observed their behaviour, and reported it to HR. Men often don’t recognize abusive behaviour and tend to dismiss it when they do.
Matt Damon is right that patting someone on the butt is not as bad as many other things, but that doesn’t make it okay in any circumstances. It’s like saying it’s okay to steal a bracelet because other thieves take the whole jewellery box.
We’ll have reached that point when Bill and Hillary Clinton are called to account. We aren’t there yet.
I’m inclined to believe the complainant in this case because what she says is consistent with behaviour Sarsour has displayed in the past. I hope that this is properly investigated.
Let me just explain one thing. The idea of I think she is right or I lean this way just does not cut it. What you must have in any company to properly evaluate and punish sexual harassment is a system in place to do this. The EEOC can provide all the help and even the training to do this. This is not something to take votes on. It is to be properly investigated by trained personnel outside of the chain of command. The sooner we understand this the better. I will also say, that when someone has only the alternative of going to the boss with sexual harassment, you have no system and nothing gets solved.
I agree. Every organisation should have a proper system in place,
And I take your point about it being a good one too. The US military, for example, has a process. It appears to be a disaster.
Yes, the military is following the true way to insure that sexual harassment will not be handled properly and justice will not be done. You cannot leave sexual harassment and allegations in the chain of command. It will fail almost every time. Anyone with any knowledge of this issue knows that.
If you are in a company and your supervisor harasses you, where do you report. If it is simply to the next in line supervisor you are dead. If it is to any other supervisor or boss you are dead. It will not work. There must be specific trained people within the organization to deal with and investigate sexual harassment. Not a bunch of people on a web site talking about it either. It is like talking to a bunch of kids who know almost nothing about it but sure have lots of ideas and opinions. It is just about useless.
Yes, but talking about it does help raise awareness. A lot of people have some pretty screwy ideas that need to be challenged if those ideas are ever going to change.
I thimk you mean Harvey Weinstein in the first paragraph.
Indeed, this miscreant shares his last name with Bret Weinstein whom JAC has been bravely and emphatically defended on this website. Perhaps this is the unconscious (though not Freudian) source of the typo.
My mistake; now fixed.
Sorry you refer to Grania in the penultimate paragraph but don’t appear to mention them earlier on in the piece. Who is he/she?
She’s a frequent commenter and long-time website member.
I have long long held that every ideology has its bad apples in it, and that every movement should be wary of the character of their supporters. This is NOT the same thing a test for ideological purity.
(Indeed, the Republican party might be in better shape now, if had been more willing in the ’70s to utterly disown Richard Nixon.)
The “believe the women” notion needs to be replaced with “take the women seriously”, or to put it another way, “trust but verify”. Simply accepting any accusation without supporting facts or evidence is dangerous and needs to stop. It is not acceptable to swing from one extreme, that of ignoring rape and harassment to the other, blindly accepting every claim and punishing the accused in the court of public opinion. In no other realm of criminal law would we simply accept an unverified accusation. I’ll probably get hateful replies for saying that but I stand by it.
From a ‘vote’ on an earlier post on WEIT (can;t find it now), I think a majority here would agree.
In that vote most thought that sexual harassment and rape on campuses should be investigated and dealt with by the law and court, not by (often ‘fanciful’) university agents. I guess you will get little flak here for that.
I’ve never understood how so many people can fall for people like Sarsour. Maybe I’m too cynical or something, but I swear I can smell a rotten fish like Sarsour from a mile away. But then again, the slightest hint of idolization always engenders an involuntary disgust response in me. Sarsour triggers my gag reflex in at least 1/2 a dozen ways.
It IS surprising, isn’t it. To be honest, it baffles me. People who are otherwise sane, rational and good and decent still swallow her nonsense without criticism.
The phenomena is not restricted to any particular group though. Look how many (nominally) similarly rational people think the Pope or the Dhali Llama or any of dozens of other religious leaders are free from the very same odor of rotten fish.
+1
She’s a get out of guilt free card.
#metoo 🙂 I too can smell something off with Sarsour. It’s all in her attitude. It’s the same with how I am 99% sure Sam Harris isn’t a sexist.
I see what you did there. 🙂
I must admit to disliking Sarsour so much I would feel great relief to see her discredited. No true feminist or humanist wants Sharia rule. I suspect she’s a skilled enough con artist to get away this.
I do not think she is skilled, but rather that Westerners have been conditioned to become excited or at least submissive when they see a hijab.
I doubt this happened because Islam is a religion that has the utmost respect for women. /s
And that is why she’ll get away with it.
MsSarsour is right, Asmi must be a liar, no Muslim male would press the noble parts of his anatomy into that desert of fat! /s
The real weird thing is that when one googles Asmi Fathelbab, one gets onlyMs Sarsour. It is as if Asmi does not exist.
Just the thing Ms Sarsour would wish, I guess.
Awful if this is true and not a surprise, not only because it’s Linda Sarsour but also because women like Sarsour have been doing this to women for, well, since there were human women, I suspect. I’ve stated here before how women can be oppressive of other women because they are the system’s social enforcers. I find the #metoo movement was fantastic at letting good men (I tend to believe most men are good and I really hope I’m right) know how pervasive the issue is but I hope it also disarmed some of those women who like to brandish the sword of social conformity.
It looks particularly outrageous because she is suppose to be a feminist and a woman. However, whether it is her protecting the harasser or a man, it causes the same damage.
I will explain another sexual harassment case within the firm I worked for just for example. This one caused me to get a new assignment and go to Okinawa for 5 years.
The fellow who had the job before me in Okinawa came under investigation for allegations of sexual harassment. I was only told about it so that I could prepare to make the move. I did not learn of all the facts of this case until months later after he was long gone. Basically he had been harassing the secretary at work and she, a local national employee, turned him in. She took the complaint to the HR branch and the report was turned over to EEO at HQ in Dallas Tx. Because this individual was a management level employee they sent an EEO investigator over to do the job.
It was discovered that the allegations were true. This employee harassed her at work and even after work by going to her house, sometimes late at night. He was also a drunk so that became part of the story. The EEO investigator then went back to his previous assignment in main land Japan to do some checking there. And sure enough they discovered he had been sexually harassing the secretary there as well. It just had not been reported. This employee voluntarily resigned and left the company because he knew he was guilty and did not want to stop drinking either.
My point here is – these investigations are done by trained professionals and they know what they are doing. It is not a he said she said deal. They investigate these things completely and in private. They look at the history and they interview lots of people. They almost always get it right. I can also tell you that his boss and his bosses boss tried to protect him in this and get him off. No chance and those people were flat told to step aside and shut up or they would be fired for cause. End of story.
This is Sarsour’s denial, claiming it’s “character assassination” and that she’s afraid for her safety now.
I’ve sent this to Jerry and he may or may not weigh in, but I’d love to hear thoughts from the gallery.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/hannahallam/womens-march-organizer-linda-sarsour-denies-report-she
My thought – these things cannot be resolved in the court of public opinion. It should always be properly investigated by trained investigators. But this organization certainly has nothing so you are on your own. Investigating yourself is never a good idea. Ask Congress or the military.
She may be unsafe. I can see that. But, that doesn’t stop her from attacking others that she also makes unsafe. People like Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
I think that in compliance to intersectional postmodernist feminists we should believe the survivor no matter what.
I think the thing is we’ve got two basic things going on in these discussions:
1: Unacceptable behaviour.
2: A power imbalance feeding into that behaviour.
The thing is – we’ve got to deal with 1 no matter who is doing it.
A lot of the objection to the far left right now is that they engage in harassment campaigns, a lot of the objection to the right is the same.
The fact is that the base behaviour is unacceptable no matter what. If someone is rubbing his crotch on you it doesn’t matter if you’re an overweight woman beneath him in the social order, or a seven foot pro-wrestler and he’s a beggar, it is not acceptable behaviour.
It is tempting to say then that the identity is irrelevant except…
2 is kind of important. I think most of us here are not exactly buying into free will as being a thing, so our view of “justice” is about reducing negative behaviours.
So if the power imbalance between men and women is causing more of this bad behaviour, we kind of have to talk about that, because while it is always unacceptable on an individual level, what individuals do can be shaped and changed by the environment they’re in, and we’ve got to talk about how to build an environment that reduces incidences.
But just like in 1, it doesn’t matter if the people enabling this sort of behaviour are male or female, they’ve got to be dealt with the same.
But having these two discussions going on at the same time, well, it seems almost inevitable that we end up at…
https://www.google.co.za/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwirt67I05jYAhUGWxQKHQTjCpgQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.teepublic.com%2Ft-shirt%2F2132740-cross-porpoises&psig=AOvVaw109EqU8mKtmTqbmhA7zQG3&ust=1513861459400992