I Can Protect His Future, but She Can’t Be Helped: Himpathy and Hysteria in Administrator Rationalizations of Institutional Betrayal

Nicole Bedera

The Journal of Higher Education, 2024, vol. 95, issue 1, 30-53

Abstract: It is well-established fact that sexual assault survivors who report the violence they endured are retraumatized by the reporting process, but there is limited research on how these institutional betrayals are enacted. The current study draws on ethnographic observation and interview data to explore how 24 administrators use gendered rationalization frames to justify betrayal in Title IX cases. Specifically, administrators invoke himpathy to define their primary role as protecting the futures of young men. To defend this view from critique, they condemn how survivors use Title IX by casting them as hysterical women who are either mistaken in labeling an experience as sexual assault or suffering from trauma too severe for a Title IX process to repair. Taken together, these frames portray institutional betrayal as moral, even as these ideologies reinforce gender inequality.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00221546.2023.2195771 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:uhejxx:v:95:y:2024:i:1:p:30-53

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/uhej20

DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2023.2195771

Access Statistics for this article

The Journal of Higher Education is currently edited by Mitchell Chang

More articles in The Journal of Higher Education from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().