Activists admit they can’t verify accusations of sexual assault; make accusations anyway

Extensive list of allegations presented as ‘thoughts, experiences and memories and things we have overheard’

A spreadsheet is making the rounds at Harvard accusing over a hundred men at the university and outside of it of sexual harassment and misconduct, but the creators of the spreadsheet openly admit that they cannot verify the accusations made within it.

The spreadsheet, titled “Shitty Architecture Men,” identifies by name “more than 100 men affiliated with institutions of higher education like Yale University as well as men who work for prominent architecture firms,” according to the student newspaper The Harvard Crimson.

The list of extremely specific and targeted accusations, which according to a Google Docs history was started on March 15 of this year, is “a collection of misconduct allegations and rumors,” according to an early draft of the document.

“We do not represent anything here as fact,” a later version of the list declares. “This is a compilation of thoughts, experiences and memories and things we have overheard.”

A spokesman for Harvard’s Graduate School of Design told The Crimson that the admittedly unverified and partially thought-based list “is itself a signal that we must do better to promote an open dialogue about these issues and to strive for transparency in how we as a school deal with them.”

As of press time, the list was “temporarily” closed, according to a message on the document’s front page.

“Since creating the document, the list has garnered significant momentum and grown in many different ways,” the message reads. “Due to several recent issues, such as legal threats, organizational disputes/discussions and other circumstances related to victim support, we are taking a week to close the list in order to reflect, self-critique and restructure the document in a way that we hope can ensure the utmost safety and inclusion for entrants and victims.”

A review of previous versions of the document reveal a significant amount of infighting about the nature and presentation of the list.

“It’s clear to me, a PoC person that the list is being edited by a white woman or white women or whatever, white affiliated persons,” one anonymous commenter says.

“This list’s organization is white supremacist and segregated. There is no alleged sexual misconduct that is not already raced, classed, etc. This ‘unmarking’ of race in this list’s core organization is problematicc [sic],” says another.

“I think there should be transparency about the architects of this list and their identities, because it seems patently clear that the architects are white women without any PoC on board,” says a third.

Read more at:

Recent Posts
Search By Tags
No tags yet.
Follow Us