Extrapolating from my own experience, I want to provide some context about what I presume it's like, behind the scenes, to be one of these plaintiffs. 1/
TL;DR: Staging a lawsuit like this is huge timesuck, has great costs to one's research and personal life, and offers little reward other than the knowledge you might be making things better for others in the future. 2/
There's a reason no one goes straight to lawyers. The legal system is nasty, draining, and expensive. It makes things worse before they get better.
You only go there if you've suffered so much and so unfairly that your soul has absolutely no other choice. 3/
You only go there if you've suffered so much and so unfairly that your soul has absolutely no other choice. 3/
Finding good lawyers is time-consuming. You don't just google "lawyer". Building the case is even more time-consuming. Every page of a court filing represents probably weeks of investigation, with the plaintiffs as very essential and active participants. 4/
Good lawyers want an airtight case; they don't let you make stuff up. They make you support every single claim with evidence so solid that it can convince a jury or judge. They don't let you expose yourself by lying. Very little of the evidence is shown in the court filing. 5/
This document is the outcome of hours on hours of interviews, chasing down leads, double-checking statements, reconciling claims, and so on. Witnesses contradict each other, chicken out (reasonably so), last minute leads turn up, etc. 6/
view.publitas.com/newspapers-of-…
view.publitas.com/newspapers-of-…
Scientists should be sympathetic. We know how much blood sweat and tears - checking and rechecking - goes into, say, a 6-page scientific paper. The Dartmouth filing is 72 pages. 7/
That's time that could be spent doing research, writing grants and papers, recharging with family, friends, and pets, getting much-needed exercise, or taking a mental health break. It feels like taking on long-term half-time job and trying to continue one's main job. 8/
Except that rapey powerful people and their numerous allies know about that part-time job and are putting huge amounts of effort into sabotaging it or at least muddying the waters. 9/
Plaintiffs look self-assured and composed in public but have intense and exhausting self-doubt. That's because people they love and trust tell them over and over - sensibly - that it's easier to just avoid the situation than to fight back.
It IS easier. 10/
It IS easier. 10/
And many people they respect - and who control their career - at their home institution and in the field will blame them for the reputational damage they are causing. And those people are right - there's simply no way to do the lawsuit without causing collateral damage. 11/
Publicizing a case takes intense strategy - much more than you'd suppose from reading a few news articles. Even people ostensibly on their side will criticize specific decisions they make about how to implement the strategy. The pressure to be absolutely flawless is extreme. 12/
They will be accused of doing it for money. Plaintiffs interested in money don't go public. They approach the University quietly and seek settlement. Plaintiffs go public when their goal is to fix the malignant environment. They pay a major pecuniary cost in doing so. 13/
So when people say "believe women" yes, we should. But in this kind of case, there are many structural reasons why the chance they are lying or exaggerating is infinitesimal. 14/
And when people say these women are heroes, that might just be thinking about the career risk - very real - they are taking on. But let's also recognize the huge amount of unpaid labor that goes on to producing this kind of case. /End
