Reitman was required to work with Ms Ronnell in an unspecified manner in order to obtain his Ph.D. Additionally, she was also assigned as his student advisor. Reitman claimed professor Ronnell emailed and called him constantly. The communication was often sexual in nature and she refused to work with him if he did not reciprocate. He also said she would visit him at his home, climb into bed with him, and force him to kiss and touch her. Additionally, Mr. Reitman said he was expected to work with Professor Ronell often at her apartment. Kissing and touching would typically occur. Reitman, who is gay, said he continued working with Ronnel because he saw no other way to obtain his Ph.D. from N.Y.U. He had previously contacted University officials about her behavior but received no help.
Reitman provided the NY Times with emails supporting his claims.
Two years after graduating from N.Y.U., Reitman filed a Title IX complaint against his former adviser, alleging sexual harassment, sexual assault, stalking and retaliation.
N.Y.U. dragged out the investigation over an 11 month period. Male students accused of sexual assault rarely receive more than a few days of investigation from the school. N.Y.U found Professor Ronell responsible for sexual harassment but cleared her of the other allegations. She was suspended from her duties for one year.
Many feminists were angered at the University's verdict. They collectively wrote a letter claiming Reitman was waging a malicious campaign against her and that there was no actual evidence the Professor was guilty of anything. The entire letter appears below.
Feminist letter (pdf)
One of the signators, Diane Davis, from University of Texas-Austin, said she and her fellow feminists were particularly angered Mr. Reitman was using Title IX law. She stated "I am of course very supportive of what Title IX and the #MeToo movement are trying to do, of their efforts to confront and to prevent abuses, for which they also seek some sort of justice, But it's for that very reason that it's so disappointing when this incredible energy for justice is twisted and turned against itself, which is what many of us believe is happening in this case."
This case emphasizes feminist double standard. A feminist was guilty of work place sexual harassment. She preached against sexual harassment of women but had no problem harassing a male student. Rather than criticize her, fellow feminists attacked her male victim. Additionally, they defended the female sexual harasser. They were appalled Title IX's code of conduct was being applied to a woman. They viewed Title IX law as a set of rules only for men.
Also, when Ronnell was accused of sexual harassment, feminists demanded "a fair hearing" for her. However, when any male student is accused, a different set of rules is applied. Being "fair" is unnecessary.
Gender double standard is a traditional feminist trait. It was on displayed in Illinois when 100 women proposed a two tiered judicial system based on gender. It was also on display in the Washington Post when a feminist wrote an article titled "Why Cant We Hate Men" .
FEMINISM IS SEXISM. Feminists do not judge people on the basis of their actions. They judge them on the basis of their gender.