艾维托·罗内尔教授否认所有性骚扰指控的声明

原文=Dr. Mangalika de Silva （代表罗内尔教授发布的新闻声明）

编译=王芊霓

媒体=澎湃新闻

纽约大学终身教授罗内尔（Avital Ronell）是雷特曼（ Nimrod Reitman ）提出的关于性骚扰，非自愿性接触，跟踪和报复的第九条指控（Title IX allegations）的被指控对象。雷特曼是她从2012年春到2015年6月的博士生。

Avital Ronell (left), a professor at New York U., and Nimrod Reitman, her former student

罗内尔一直绝对地，无条件地否认雷特曼的所有指控，这是她承担教育工作四十年的职业生涯中首次也是唯一一次面临的指控。

第九条指控的相关调查持续了11个月，在此期间罗内尔没有机会对雷特曼的指控进行对抗，质疑或盘问。

调查没有发现性接触的证据，据雷特曼称于2012年5月在罗内尔的巴黎公寓（在他作为研究生就读纽约大学之前）和2012年10月的台风桑迪期间发生过。

尽管如此，媒体还是报道了雷特曼未经证实的指控，好像这些指控是事实，完全无视调查发现它们是不可信的。

雷特曼称，在2012年5月访问巴黎期间与罗内尔住在一起时，他是反复的和不受欢迎的性接触的对象。在这次逗留后不久，雷特曼给了她一本著名的同性恋作家安德烈·吉德的书。雷特曼的题词是：“致我最美好的艾维托，确实巴黎可以永远作为我们的私人音乐剧“Grapheme”的另外一部分- 温柔地 - 永远 - 永远 - 尼姆罗德，法国巴黎12.5.12。”

两年后，在2014年，雷特曼还给她发了一封关于他们在巴黎的美好回忆的电子邮件：“发送温柔的爱和亲吻，我也记得我们在巴黎的美丽情景 - 生动而且永远发生，我送你音乐，爱，和亲吻。”（2014年11月21日）。

这封电子邮件与他的性接触的主张完全不符。

雷特曼指控了2012年10月的进一步的性接触，他坚持认为罗内尔在飓风桑迪期间与他待了两天，当时她的公寓没有电或水。该报告发现他的指控未经证实，而且不可信。

然而罗内尔继续被与雷特曼的性关系指控和诽谤，这些指控经过了11个月的彻底调查，并被认为是不可信的。

雷特曼还向第九号调查调查员提交了“医疗记录”，试图证实他的说法。这些是不完整的，由他单方面编辑的，奇怪的是，有些医疗记录是他自己的笔迹。调查人员发现了“可靠性可疑”的医疗记录，称他的指控严重存疑。

雷特曼关于纠缠行为的指控是基于罗内尔定期和频繁的沟通，以及与他的面对面会谈。该报告未同意这项指控，这与雷特曼的事件版本相矛盾，报告发现他们各自都经常发起这样的电子邮件，事实上，这些信件通常与他们的工作关系有关。

雷特曼指控罗内尔对他报复—— 自他2015年春天从纽约大学毕业后，罗内尔挫败他的就业前景，她对自己的职业生涯产生了负面影响 ——也被认为是没有根据的。雷特曼从未投诉过，因此罗内尔无从报复。此外，雷特曼承认罗内尔确实帮助他获得过两个研究生的职位。

Title IX报告还发现，在她给雷特曼的电子邮件中，罗内尔使用了宠物的名字，并发表了亲密的陈述，调查组认为这些陈述是雷特曼不欢迎的，并且违反了纽约大学的性骚扰政策。然而，这些电子邮件是在特别的非性的背景下撰写的，对雷特曼给罗内尔的电子邮件的粗略的审查表明，如果他不是在发起，那么他至少鼓励了他后来声称构成骚扰的语言类型。罗内尔，一个女同性恋，描述了她和雷特曼，一个男同性恋的通信，主要是同性恋编码的、有文学典故的，诗意的表现，明显夸张的温柔表达，并且这样的通信经常由雷特曼发起和回复。她给他发的电子邮件中没有任何内容的本质是性化的，而雷特曼给罗内尔的电子邮件的例子如下：

“Mon 艾维托，亲爱的，特别的......我不知道没有你我将如何幸存下来。你是最好的，我的快乐，我的奇迹。送你无限的爱，亲吻和奉献，你的 – n”。（2013年6月29日）;

“谢谢你最亲爱的。在这个下雨天我也抱着你，谢谢你的一切“。 （2014年12月6日）;

“亲爱的，我今晚很高兴见到你并共度时光。它是如此神奇和重要。我们共同的亲密关系是我们在柏林的光辉节奏。感谢你，为这些共同的，完全的和纯洁的爱的时刻！......无限， - n”（1/17/2015）;

我亲爱的艾维托，只是送你无限的亲吻和爱。谢谢你是我最宝贵的祝福。爱，你的 - n。 （2013年3月16日）;

“亲爱的......想念你，爱你！ - n“（2015年2月4日）;

“宝贝，今天见到你真是太好了。你看起来很棒......我非常想你，非常等待你的到来......“（2/13/2015）;

“亲爱的，我这次这次东方之旅期间没有收到你的消息......请让我知道你很好，我一直在担心你......拥抱，n”。 （2015年7月29日）。

几乎所有来自雷特曼的电子邮件都包含了请求罗内尔审阅和编辑他的写作的要求。罗内尔作为他所在领域的杰出人物，从这个方面说，他这样的请求显然是剥削她。事实上，在他（未发表的）论文的致谢部分，他写道：“我感谢艾维托的教学，细致的阅读，敏感的支持......以及她不懈地倾听我所有的想法。”（2015年10月15日）。

罗内尔没有理由相信她与雷特曼的任何通信都是令人反感的。他一直以“爱和无限的感激”的形式写信给她，抬高她，她则回避了类似的赞赏。这些互动电子邮件，没有任何性语言或背景，为Title IX的发现提供了唯一的基础。仅此一点也应引起关注。

然后，Title IX调查员仅根据这些电子邮件推测，未经同意的非性的身体接触可能已经发生了。事实上，他们之间没有这种身体接触。

和雷特曼和罗内尔有私下了解的证人（包括纽约大学规模较小的德语系的同事，学生等）和了解他们的学术和公开露面的证人，一致明确地驳斥了观察到过他们之间有任何不良性行为或骚扰行为。相反，许多证人想起了和雷特曼的谈话，在谈话中他赞扬罗内尔，并证明了他对罗内尔的时间和注意力的追求。

罗内尔在给雷特曼的电邮中使用的语言与她与其他许多人使用的语言没有不同，也都没有性的背景，而雷特曼却在这种语言的使用中看到了一个机会：通过采用和鼓励他们之间的语言类型来巧妙地操纵罗内尔，同时以严厉邪恶的语言向别人告发她。

2013年6月29日，雷特曼写信给罗内尔：“Mon Avital，亲爱的特别的，我现在只是放心（原文如此）你美丽而精致的信息......我感谢你无限的理解和感性，这些都是无法衡量的，所有这些我都以温柔和爱回应。我非常感谢你带领我度过了我的缓解期。我不知道没有你我将如何活下来。你是最棒的 ！！！我如此爱你。你是最好的，我的快乐，我的奇迹。总是亲吻和奉献，你的 - n。”

然而，此后不久的2013年7月20日，Reitman发送了一封电子邮件给Gregory Lennon（罗内尔不知情），声称：“明天，我要去见那个怪物。”

在其他场合，他写信给其他人，称罗内尔为“女巫”，“恶魔”，“精神病患者”，“苦兮兮的老太太”等贬义词，同时在与她交流时热情洋溢。

这种两面性破坏了他声称遭到她性骚扰的说法。

雷特曼在纽约大学的三年的时间里从未投诉过罗内尔涉嫌骚扰，这进一步破坏了他的主张。尽管如此，雷特曼向Title IX调查员表示他曾向德文系主任和行政助理提出申诉，但他们都否认接到过这样的投诉。

雷特曼从未使用纽约大学广为人知的旨在减少此类行为，并保护投诉人免遭报复的性骚扰投诉程序。雷特曼声称自己是罗内尔几乎每天都进行性骚扰和不必要的身体接触的对象，却直到2017年8月才开始第一次投诉 – 这是在他获得博士学位两年之后，当时他无法获得终身职位。

雷特曼无法找到工作，而不是通过电邮被施加了性骚扰，任何实际或感知的，才是此事的重点。

附英文原文：

PRESS RELEASE ON BEHALF OF PROFESSOR AVITAL RONELL 

Dated: New York, NY August 16, 2018 

For all queries and questions, please contact:

Dr. Mangalika de Silva
Email: mangsilva@gmail.com
Tel: 1-347-712-9260 

Professor Avital Ronell, an NYU tenured professor, has been the subject of Title IX allegations made by Nimrod Reitman of sexual harassment, non-consensual sexual contact, stalking and retaliation. Reitman was her doctoral student from the spring of 2012 to June 2015. 

Ronell has consistently, categorically, and unqualifiedly denied all of Reitman’s allegations, the first and only such allegations made against Ronell during her forty year career as an educator. 

The Title IX investigation took place over eleven months, during which Ronell had no opportunity to confront, question, or cross-examine Reitman regarding his allegations. 

No evidence was found of sexual contact, which Reitman had alleged took place in Ronell’s Paris apartment in May, 2012 (prior to his attending NYU as a graduate student), and during Hurricane Sandy in October, 2012. 

The media has nonetheless pounced on Reitman’s unsustained and unproven allegationsas if they were fact, completely ignoring that the investigation found them to be not credible. 

Reitman alleged that while staying with Ronell during his visit to Paris in May, 2012, he was the subject of repeated and unwanted sexual contact. Shortly after this stay, Reitman gave her a gift of a book by André Gide, a renowned gay writer. His inscription reads: “For my most wonderful Avital, indeed we would always have Paris for yet another aspect of our own private musical “Grapheme” – tenderly – always – ever – Nimrod Paris 12.5.12.” 

Two years later, in 2014, Reitman also emailed her about his beautiful memories of their time in Paris together: “Sending tender love and kisses, I too remember and reminded of our beautiful scenery in Paris – vivid and always occurring I send you music, love, and kisses.” (11/21/2014). 

This email is flatly inconsistent with his claim of sexual contact.

Reitman alleged further sexual contact in October 2012, when he insisted that Ronell stay with him for two days during Hurricane Sandy, while her apartment was without power or water. The Report found his allegations unproven and, by definition, not credible. 

Yet Ronell continues to be accused and maligned over accusations of sexual relations with Reitman that were thoroughly investigated for eleven months and were deemed not credible. 

Reitman also submitted “medical records” to the Title IX investigators in an attempt to corroborate his claims. These were incomplete, unilaterally redacted by him and, bizarrely, some records were in his own handwriting. The investigators found the medical records of “questionable reliability,” calling the truth of his allegations into serious question. 

Reitman’s allegations of stalking were based on Ronell’s regular and frequent communications and in-person meetings with him. The Report disagreed, again contradicting Reitman’s version of events, and found that each of them had frequently initiated such emails and, in fact, the correspondence was mostly related to their working relationship. 

Reitman’s allegations of retaliation against Ronell - - that she negatively impacted his professional career since his graduation from NYU in the spring of 2015 by actively thwarting his job prospects - - were also determined to be unfounded. Reitman had never made a complaint, so there was nothing for Ronell to retaliate against. Further, Reitman admitted that Ronell actually helped him secure two post-graduate positions. 

The Title IX Report found that in her emails to Reitman, Ronell used pet names and made statements of an intimate nature, which they determined to be unwanted by Reitman, and were violative of NYU’s sexual harassment policies. However, these emails were written in a particularly non-sexual context, and an even cursory review of Reitman’s emails to Ronell show that if he was not initiating, then he was at least encouraging the type of language he later claimed constituted harassment. Ronell, a lesbian, describes the correspondence between herself and Reitman, who is gay, as largely gay-coded, with literary allusions, poetic runs and obviously exaggerated expressions of tenderness that were often initiated and returned by Reitman. Her emails to him contain nothing of a sexual nature, and examples of Reitman’s emails to Ronell include the following: 

• “Mon Avital, beloved and special one... I don’t know how I would have survived without you. You are the best, my joy, my miracle. Sending you infinite love, kisses and devotion, your – n.” (6/29/13); 

• “Thank you most darlingst. On this rainy day I too hold you and thank you for everything”. (12/6/2014); 

• “Sweet Beloved, I was so happy to see you tonight, and spend time together. It was so magical and important, crucial on [sic] so many ways. Our shared intimacy was a glorious cadence to our time in Berlin. Thank you for these moments of togetherness and utter and pure love!...Infinitely, - n” (1/17/2015); 

• My beloved Avital, Just sending you infinite kisses and love. Thank you for your being my most precious blessing. Loving, your – n. (3/16/2013); 

• “Beloved...Missing you and loving you ! – n” (2/4/2015); 

• “Baby. It was so wonderful seeing you today. You looked wonderful...I miss you 
  terribly and await seeing you already...”(2/13/2015); 

• “Honig most, dearest one...Sending love and misses. Je t’embrasse”. 
  (03/19/2015); and 

• “Dearest, I have not heard from you all through this oriental trip...Please drop me a line to let me know you are well, I have been worried about you...hugs, n”. (7/29/2015). [Written after Reitman received his doctoral decree]. 

Almost all of the emails from Reitman included a request to review and edit his writings. He had chosen Ronell as a luminary in his field and was clearly exploiting her in that regard. Indeed, in his acknowledgments section of his (unpublished) thesis he wrote: “I thank Avital’s teaching, careful reading, sensitive support...and her unremitting listening to all my whims.” (10/15/2015). 

Ronell had no reason to believe that any of her correspondence with Reitman was objectionable. He persistently wrote to her with expressions of “love and infinite gratitude,” exalting her intellectual powers and she lobbed back similar appreciations. These mutual emails, devoid of any sexual language or context whatsoever, provide the sole basis for the Title IX findings. This alone should be cause for concern. 

The Title IX investigators then conjectured based solely on these emails, that unwanted non-sexual physical contact may have occurred. In fact, there was no such physical contact between them. 

Witnesses with personal knowledge of Reitman and Ronell (including colleagues, students and co-workers of the relatively small NYU Department of German), and of their academic and public appearances, uniformly and categorically refuted any indication or observation of any untoward sexual or harassing conduct between them. On the contrary, many witnesses relate conversations with Reitman in which he praised Ronell and who testified to his pursuit of her time and attention. 

The type of language Ronell used in her emails to Reitman is no different from the language that she used with many others and that Reitman used with her, to which there was no sexual context whatsoever. Reitman saw in this use of language an opportunity to manipulate Ronell by adopting and encouraging a tone between them while simultaneously denouncing her in starkly vicious terms to others. 

On June 29, 2013, Reitman wrote to Ronell: “Mon Avital, beloved and special one, I only now relieved (sic) your beautiful and exquisite message...I thank you for your infinite understanding and sensitivities which are always beyond measure, all of which I reciprocate with tenderness and love. I thank you so much for walking me through this catabasis [descent]. I don’t know how I would have survived without you. You are the best !!! I love you so much. You are the best, my joy, my miracle. Kisses and devotion always. Yours – n.” 

Yet, shortly thereafter, Reitman sent an email to Gregory Lennon (unknown to Ronell) dated July 20, 2013 stating: “Tomorrow, I see the monster.” 

On further occasions, he wrote to others referring to Ronell as “witch”, “evil”, “psychotic”, “bitter old lady” and other derogatory terms, while simultaneously bubbling over with effusive affection in his communications with her. 

This duplicity undermines his claim to have been sexually harassed by her. 

Further undermining his claims, is that Reitman, over a period of three and one-half years, never once complained to anyone at NYU about Ronell’s alleged harassment. Nonetheless, Reitman stated to the Title IX investigators that he had complained to the Chair of the German Department and the administrative assistant in the Department, but they each denied such complaints.. 

Reitman never availed himself of NYU’s well-publicized procedures for complaints of sexual harassment, crafted to allay such conduct and shield complainants from retaliation. Reitman, who claimed to be the subject of almost “daily” acts of sexual harassment and unwanted physical contact by Ronell, failed to make a single complaint until August 2017 - - two years after he secured his doctoral degree and only then, when he was unable to secure a tenure- track position. 

The inability of Reitman to find a job, and not any actual or perceived sexual harassment of him by email, is what this case is about. 

原文链接：

https://theoryilluminati.com/texts-and-contexts/f/an-eleven-month-denial-of-all-nimrod-reitman-allegations