Sexual Harassment in the UK

Parliament: Lessons from the #MeToo

Era Christina Julios
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/sexual-harassment-in-the-uk-parliament-lessons-from
-the-metoo-era-christina-julios/
GENDER AND POLITICS
SERIES EDITORS: JOHANNA KANTOLA · SARAH CHILDS

Sexual Harassment in the

UK Parliament

Lessons from the #MeToo Era

Christina Julios
 Gender and Politics

Series Editors
Johanna Kantola, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland
Sarah Childs, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, UK
The Gender and Politics series celebrated its 7th anniversary at the 5th
European Conference on Politics and Gender (ECPG) in June 2017
in Lausanne, Switzerland having published more than 35 volumes to
date. The original idea for the book series was envisioned by the series
editors Johanna Kantola and Judith Squires at the first ECPG in Belfast
in 2009, and the series was officially launched at the Conference in
Budapest in 2011. In 2014, Sarah Childs became the co-editor of the
series, together with Johanna Kantola. Gender and Politics showcases the
very best international writing. It publishes world class monographs and
edited collections from scholars - junior and well established - working
in politics, international relations and public policy, with specific refer-
ence to questions of gender. The titles that have come out over the
past years make key contributions to debates on intersectionality and
diversity, gender equality, social movements, Europeanization and insti-
tutionalism, governance and norms, policies, and political institutions.
Set in European, US and Latin American contexts, these books provide
rich new empirical findings and push forward boundaries of feminist and
politics conceptual and theoretical research. The editors welcome the
highest quality international research on these topics and beyond, and
look for proposals on feminist political theory; on recent political trans-
formations such as the economic crisis or the rise of the populist right;
as well as proposals on continuing feminist dilemmas around participa-
tion and representation, specific gendered policy fields, and policy making
mechanisms. The series can also include books published as a Palgrave
pivot. For further information on the series and to submit a proposal for
consideration, please get in touch with Senior Editor Ambra Finotello,
ambra.finotello@palgrave.com.
This series is indexed by Scopus.

More information about this series at

https://link.springer.com/bookseries/14998
 Christina Julios

Sexual Harassment
in the UK Parliament
Lessons from the #MeToo Era
Christina Julios
The Open University
London, UK

ISSN 2662-5814 ISSN 2662-5822 (electronic)

Gender and Politics
ISBN 978-3-030-87139-0 ISBN 978-3-030-87140-6 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87140-6

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2022
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights
of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc.
in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such
names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for
general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and informa-
tion in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither
the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with
respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been
made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
To Derek, with love
 Acknowledgments

In line with its predecessors, this book owns a debt of gratitude to

the endless generosity and continuing support of my family, friends and
colleagues. I would therefore like to thank them all. First, I am indebted
to my friend and mentor Dr. Anne Kershen, Honorary Senior Research
Fellow, Queen Mary University of London, for being a constant source
of inspiration and wisdom over the years. I am also grateful to fellow
academics at The Open University for encouraging and facilitating my
scholarly work, specially Professor Umut Erel, Dr. Zoe Doye, Wendy
Humphreys and Matt Staples. The editorial and production teams at
Palgrave Macmillan have worked tireless to ensure the smooth progress of
this project from its inception to its completion. I am particularly thankful
to Ambra Finotello and Anne-Kathrin Birchley-Brun for the opportu-
nity to develop my original manuscript proposal into a viable book.
Thanks are also due to Balaji Varadharaju for patiently overseeing the
painstaking process that has allowed the book to see the light. The work
has also benefited from the insightful and constructive feedback provided
by expert peer reviewers.
On a personal level, I am forever grateful to my late parents Adelaida
and Rafael to whom I owe an immeasurable debt of gratitude. They
were the most wonderful and generous folk, with their brilliant minds,
boundless zest for life and wicked sense of humour. Always loving and
supportive, they championed my writing endeavours from the outset, and
would have been immensely proud of this new volume, as they were of all

vii
viii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

my academic work. My father, in particular, had been looking forward to

seeing the book published, but sadly passed away before it was in print. I
would therefore like to extend the dedication of the book to my beloved
mamá y papá: two truly inspirational, courageous and admirable individ-
uals. I am blessed to have enjoyed many happy years with such amazing
parents, and they will forever be sorely missed. Their legacy lives on in
all of us who loved them, and whose lives they touched so deeply. I
am also indebted to my dear sister Adela and her husband Juanma for
their strength, endless affection and unwavering support. Likewise, I am
very fortunate to be able to rely on my friends Kath, Rosa, Amanda and
Patricia, whose enduring friendship and decades-old sisterhood are price-
less. Thanks are also due to Iris and Deanna for welcoming me into their
lives with such warmth and kindness, as so did Michael, who is sadly
no longer with us. Little Sandford gets a mention too for being such
a delightful bundle of joy. Naturally, my greatest debt is to my dearest
Derek for filling every day with love, music and laughter.
Finally, I would like to pay tribute to the courage of survivors of sexual
offences everywhere, whether Members of the British Parliament, Holly-
wood actresses or ordinary citizens. The countless narratives depicted in
this volume are a testament to their bravery in speaking up, often at
considerable cost. Their stories are also a reminder of the intractable social
problem of sexual harassment and abuse in the workplace, which still
blights the lives of so many people. This book shines a light on their
experiences, while suggesting various ways forward. Given the subject
matter, however, a note of caution must be sounded for the benefit of the
reader. A volume of this kind inevitably contains numerous accounts of
sexual harassment and violence by survivors, as well as perpetrators’ own
versions of events. Some of the unvarnished descriptions here depicted
are rather graphic in detail, and readers may find the material unsettling.
These powerful narratives must nevertheless be heard, for they bring to
life the often hidden reality of everyday sexual transgressions in the work-
place. The present volume ultimately provides survivors with a collective
voice. It also gives hope to silent victims everywhere.
 About This Book

This book explores the phenomenon of sexual harassment in the British

Parliament today and efforts to tackle it. Drawing on various case studies
as well as media, academic and parliamentary sources, the volume unveils
a ‘toxic political culture’ where endemic sexual transgressions thrive.
Underpinned by an intersectional feminist perspective, the work points
to multiple systems of gendered oppression as the root causes. They
include a combination of factors such as gender, socio-economic status,
prevailing patriarchal attitudes, institutional inequality and widespread
sexism. With countless MPs across the political spectrum accused of sexual
misconduct, Westminster’s experience is placed within the context of the
devolved government institutions in Scotland and Wales; both of which
have been similarly affected by sexual harassment claims. Britain’s expe-
rience is, in turn, viewed against the global rise of the US-led social
movement #MeToo supporting those affected by sexual transgressions.
In considering the lessons of #MeToo for tackling sexual offences in
Parliament, the book identifies key challenges, including a prevailing
gender power gap, institutional barriers to reporting abuse, the misuse of
Non-disclosure Agreements (NDAs) to silence victims, and deep-seated
misogynistic organizational cultures. As the first scholarly work of its kind,
the volume fills a gap in the literature, while raising important questions
about the dynamics of gender and power in the modern workplace. The
book ultimately suggests the need to redress the current status quo, in
order to effect long-lasting change.

ix
 Praise for Sexual Harassment
in the UK Parliament

“This book makes an important contribution to our understanding of

women’s workplace rights in British politics that will have relevance to
academic and generalist audiences globally. It carefully and insightfully
documents how the #MeToo movement has shaped women’s experiences
in British politics, the progress that has been made to address this problem
to date, and the steps still needed to be taken to put an end to gender-
based workplace violence. Well worth the read.”
—Tracey Raney, Professor, Ryerson University, Canada

“This is an important book that offers deep insight into sexual harass-
ment in politics against the timely context of #MeToo. Julios takes us on
a journey through the historical context against which we can understand
sexual harassment in the workplace, and in the context of the UK Parlia-
ment in particular. The book examines recent government strategies to
address sexual violence in the workplace, and also critically considers insti-
tutional barriers to eradicating these practices, drawing on a wide body of
feminist research about gendered power relations in a range of public
spaces and institutions.”
—Vanita Sundaram, Professor, University of York, UK

xi
 Contents

1 Introduction: The Politics of Sexual Harassment 1

2 Understanding Sexual Harassment in the #MeToo Era 37
3 From #MeToo to the Palace of ‘Sexminster’ 81
4 UK’s Devolution and Sexual Harassment: Scotland
and Wales Too 127
5 Cleaning up the Houses of Parliament 157
6 Sexual Harassment Beyond British Politics 193
7 Conclusion: Heeding the #MeToo Lessons? 227

Index 269

xiii
 About the Author

Dr. Christina Julios is an academic author whose research interests

include gender equality, Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG)
and gender activism. She is an Honorary Associate at The Open Univer-
sity, and a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy. Dr. Julios is also
a former Honorary Research Fellow and Associate Lecturer at Birk-
beck, University of London and has guest-lectured at Queen Mary,
University of London. Previously, she worked as Director of Policy and
External Affairs at the Ethnic Minority Foundation, a national charity.
She has authored the following books: Female Genital Mutilation and
Social Media (2019), Forced Marriage and ‘Honour’ Killings in Britain:
Private Lives, Community Crimes and Public Policy Perspectives (2015),
and Contemporary British Identity: English Language, Migrants and
Public Discourse (2008). In 2017, Dr. Julios’ was awarded a certificate
at the Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation’s (IKWRO)
True Honour Awards ceremony, in recognition of her scholarship and
educational work on ‘honour’-based violence.

xv
 Abbreviations

AM Assembly Members (Wales)

AWB Association of Women Barristers
BBC British Broadcasting Corporation
BSB Bar Standards Board
CBE Commander of the Order of the British Empire
CBI Confederation of British Industry
CEC Central Executive Council
CEO Chief Executive Officer
CSEW Crime Survey for England and Wales
DBE Dame Commander of the Order of the British Empire
DBS Disclosure and Barring Service
EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
EU European Union
EVAW End Violence Against Women Coalition
FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation
FGM Female Genital Mutilation
GMB Formerly General, Municipal, Boilermakers and Allied Trade
Union
GNAM Global Network for Advanced Management
HMRC Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
HR Human Resources
IBA International Bar Association
ICGP Independent Complaints and Grievance Policy (House of
Commons)
ICGS Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme (House of
Commons)

xvii
xviii ABBREVIATIONS

IGO Intergovernmental Organisation

Iicsa Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse
IKWRO Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation
ILO International Labour Organisation
LGBTQ+ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning and others
Lib Dem Liberal Democrat/s
MENA Middle East and North Africa
MP Member of Parliament
MSP Member of the Scottish Parliament
NCCL National Council for Civil Liberties
NDA Non-disclosure Agreement
NEC National Executive Committee
NGO Non-governmental Organisation
NHS National Health Service
NI Northern Ireland
NPR National Public Radio
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (United
Nations)
ONS Office for National Statistics
PM Prime Minister
QC Queen’s Counsel
SIGI Social Institutions and Gender Index
SNP Scottish National Party
SPCB Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body
SRA Solicitors Regulation Authority
TUC Trades Union Congress
UK United Kingdom
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
UNOHCHR United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights
US United States
USA United States of America
VAW Violence Against Women
VAWG Violence Against Women and Girls
VAWP Violence Against Women in Politics
WEC Women and Equalities Committee (House of Commons)
WEF World Economic Forum
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction: The Politics of Sexual

Harassment

Westminster’s Old Boys’ Club

On 1 November 2017, Sir Michael Fallon, British Secretary of State
for Defence, resigned from his post after historical allegations of sexual
harassment against him came to light (Stewart & Mason, 2017). A much-
publicised incident, which took place at a Conservative Party conference
in 2002, had seen the married father of two repeatedly touching the knee
of a female radio host, Julia Hartley-Brewer (Matthews & Robinson,
2017). In his resignation letter, Fallon acknowledged that his earlier
conduct had ‘fallen below the high standards that we require of the
Armed Forces’ (Fallon cited in Stewart & Mason, 2017). The day
after Fallon’s departure, 76-year-old Kelvin Hopkins, Labour Member
of Parliament (MP), was suspended by own his party over past claims
of sexual misconduct (Kentish, 2017). One such instance involved
Hopkins rubbing his crotch against a 24-year-old Labour activist, Ava
Etemadzadeh, at a public speaking engagement in 2013 (Kentish, 2017).
Hopkins had subsequently sent the young woman inappropriate text
messages on her mobile phone (Kentish, 2017; Siddique, 2017). Two
days before Hopkin’s suspension, another Labour activist, Bex Bailey,
revealed she had been raped at a Labour Party event some years earlier,
aged 19, but was discouraged from reporting the assault by senior staff
(Watts, 2017). On 6 November 2017, nearly a week from Bailey’s disclo-
sure, a member of the Liberal Democrats (Lib Dem) party was reportedly

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 1

Switzerland AG 2022
C. Julios, Sexual Harassment in the UK Parliament, Gender and Politics,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87140-6_1
2 C. JULIOS

suspended for raping a fellow female activist (Ferguson, 2017). At the

time these allegations surfaced, an unauthorised ‘dirty dossier’ detailing
sexual impropriety by 36 Tory Members of Parliament (MPs), including
serving Ministers and party members, was already in circulation among
Westminster staffers (Merrick, 2017). As further accusations of sexual
wrongdoing across the political spectrum flooded in, a full-blown scandal
at the so-called Palace of Sexminster had erupted before the year was over
(Bagehot, 2017; Currie et al., 2017).
This was certainly nothing new. Back in 2014, a Channel 4 News
investigation into sexual harassment in Parliament found that a third of
employees typically experienced sexual misconduct involving ‘abuse of
power’ (Newman, 2017). The vast majority of cases (70%) happened to
people under the age of 25, with many unwilling to report the abuse
for fear of damaging their future career prospects (Newman, 2017).
A hardly surprising outcome given Westminster’s working environment
has often been characterised as involving ‘family-hostile (and bachelor-
friendly) hours, pack behaviour, a culture of drinking’ and ‘Pressing the
flesh’ as ‘a way of life’ (Bagehot, 2017). Having aired Channel 4 News ’
original findings, Newman (2017) described feeling a sense of ‘déjà vu’
at the new claims of misconduct emerging four years later. British Prime
Minister, Theresa May, in turn, characterised the renewed allegations of
sexual transgressions in Parliament as ‘deeply troubling’ and called for a
‘new culture of respect’; a sentiment echoed by the Opposition Leader,
Jeremy Corbyn (BBC, 2017). Despite strong condemnation from the
main political parties and pledges to stamp out such behaviour, little,
if anything seemed to have changed (Newman, 2017). The apparent
lack of progress was indeed criticised by many within the United King-
dom’s (UK) political establishment. Ruth Davison, Scottish Conservative
Leader, for instance, pointed to Westminster’s misogynistic mindset and
called for an end to the prevailing ‘locker room culture’ (Davison cited
in Maidment, 2017). Former veteran Tory MP, Edwina Currie, further-
more, recalled entering the House of Commons in 1983 as one of only 23
female MPs, and finding a ‘maddeningly masculine place’ prone to sexual
misconduct, where women were largely ‘invisible’ (Currie et al., 2017).
Similarly, Shadow Home Secretary, Diane Abbott remembers Westmin-
ster as being ‘a very male environment’, when she first arrived as an MP
in 1987 (Abbott cited in Stewart and Walker, 2017). Having become ‘the
first black woman ever elected to the British Parliament’ (Abbott, 2019),
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 3

Abbott describes how the working culture and male-driven environment

she encountered were conducive to sexual harassment:

It was partly to do with [the] idea of all these men away from home, it
was partly to do with the fact there were eight bars and the very long
hours and the bars were open for as long as we’re sitting, and partly with
the notion that what happens in Westminster stays in Westminster. (Abbott
cited in Stewart and Walker, 2017)

Over three decades later, Westminster’ patriarchal ethos seemed to be

offering more of the same. Despite some progress, Abbot believes that,
‘there’s a long way to go’ before meaningful change in Parliament is
achieved (Abbott cited in Stewart and Walker, 2017). Feelings of dissat-
isfaction with the existing status quo were compounded by the outcome
of a recent investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct involving
Lib Dem Peer Lord Rennard (Mason, 2014). In 2013, four women had
publicly accused the former Chief Executive of the Lib Dem party of
sexual harassment (Perraudin, 2015). In spite of credible charges levelled
against him, a Queen’s Counsel (QC)-led inquiry in 2014 concluded that
Lord Rennard would face no disciplinary action, due to lack of suffi-
cient evidence (Mason, 2014; Perraudin, 2015). Instead, he was merely
admonished and encouraged to apologise for any distress caused, thus,
paving the way for his subsequent election to the party’s ruling body
(Mason, 2014; Perraudin, 2015). The controversial move saw Lib Dem
Deputy Leader, Jo Swinson, expressing ‘sadness and anger’ over her
party’s failure to expel Lord Rennard, while many of his accusers were,
instead, disbelieved or had left the party altogether (Swinson MP cited in
Mairs, 2017). By 2015, Lord Rennard would eventually resign from his
post at the behest of Lib Dem Leader, Tim Farron, but only after a public
backlash from his own party members (Perraudin, 2015).
Against this background, the present book explores the phenomenon
of sexual harassment in contemporary British Parliament and efforts to
tackle it. Drawing on various case studies and content analysis of a
wide range of parliamentary, academic and media sources, the volume
unveils a ‘toxic political culture’ where endemic sexual transgressions
thrive (Lucas cited in Allegretti, 2018a). Predictably, those affected by
such behaviour include people from a wide range of sexual orienta-
tions such as heterosexual women and men, as well as Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning and others (LGBTQ+). However,
4 C. JULIOS

given that the vast majority of reported cases involve male perpetrators
and female victims (Newman, 2017; Walker, 2017), the present work
will mainly focus on women’s experiences of sexual harassment. In doing
so, it acknowledges debates regarding gender identity, heteronormativity,
non-binary perspectives and gender-critical beliefs (Grant & Nash, 2020;
Kowalski & Scheitle, 2020; Siddique, 2021; Stock, 2021). It is never-
theless, beyond the scope of the present volume to engage with this
literature. For clarity and consistence purposes, therefore, the work will
refer to ‘women’ and ‘men’ in a broad sense. Likewise, the volume
recognises the existence of different interpretations relating to notions of
‘victimhood’ and ‘survival’. Despite widespread sympathy for their plight,
so-called victims of workplace sexual offences, for instance, are typically
portrayed rather unfavourably in the literature as being passive, devoid
of any meaningful agency, giving way to ongoing abuse and trauma and
ultimately unable to move on (Gupta, 2014). In contrast, ‘survivors’
are largely viewed in a positive light as exercising their willpower and
individual choice, displaying inner strength in the face of adversity and
capable of overcoming painful experiences to rebuild their lives (Gupta,
2014; Kelly, 1988). Conversely, the socially constructed categories of ‘vic-
tims’ and ‘survivors’ share many similarities, for they are both part of a
wider continuum relating to individuals’ personal circumstances, experi-
ences of harm, and their different responses to it (Kelly, 1988). Those
affected by sexual offences moreover find themselves constantly recon-
ciling the trauma of past events with their present reality and sense of
identity. In doing so, ‘victims’ can display bravery and agency, while
survivors may end up merely ‘existing’ as opposed to ‘thriving’ as they
attempt to move forward (Gupta, 2014). While appreciating the many
contrasting approaches to these notions, the need for simplicity means
the ‘victim’ and ‘survivor’ labels are deployed interchangeably throughout
this volume. Underpinned by an intersectional feminist perspective (Cren-
shaw, 1989, 1991), the book furthermore points to multiple ‘systems
of oppression’ (Carastathis, 2014, p. 304) that continue to disadvantage
female employees in Westminster Parliament and elsewhere. Contributing
factors to power imbalances in the workplace include gender, ethnicity
and social class, together with prevailing patriarchal attitudes, institu-
tionalised discrimination and widespread sexism. Within this context, the
volume considers the UK Government’s response to tackling the sexual
harassment problem at its very core. The work also examines persistent
barriers to reporting abuse and challenges in redressing the status quo.
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 5

A number of relevant public policy documents will accordingly be anal-

ysed including: the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s (EHRC)
(2018) Turning the tables report on tackling of sexual harassment at work;
the House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee (WEC): Sexual
Harassment in The Workplace, Fifth Report of Session 2017–19 (Hansard,
2018a); and the independent inquiry by former High Court Judge, Dame
Laura Cox DBE into The Bullying and Harassment of House of Commons
Staff (Cox, 2018).
The British Parliament’s experience is viewed within the wider context
of two contemporary, yet unprecedented developments in the United
States (US), namely: the sex-abuse scandal leading to the downfall of 66-
year-old Hollywood film tycoon Harvey Weinstein, and the ensuing rise
of the online social movement #MeToo, in support of those affected by
sexual wrongdoings (Perkins, 2017; Zacharek et al., 2017). In October
2017, newspaper exposés by The New York Times (Kantor & Twohey,
2017) and The New Yorker (Farrow, 2017) detailed multiple allegations
of sexual predation of women by Weinstein, spanning decades. The after-
math of such revelations sent shock waves through Hollywood, as an
endless stream of survivors went public with further allegations of historic
abuse. The problem proved to be endemic not only in the movie industry,
but across whole employment sectors in the US and abroad, thus turning
a localised issue into a global phenomenon. This soon became apparent
when the online social media platform Twitter’s #MeToo hashtag went on
to feature millions of similar disclosures of workplace misconduct world-
wide. Among the myriad of claims that surfaced, dozens of British MPs
stood accused of engaging in sexual harassment at the Palace of West-
minster (Bagehot, 2017). The present volume thus brings together these
transatlantic developments, while considering their wider social impact.
By analysing for the first-time sexual harassment in the UK Parliament in
light of contemporaneous events in the US, the book fills a gap in the
academic literature. In doing so, the work ultimately furthers knowledge
of sexual offences at the core of the British political establishment, while
raising important questions about the dynamics of gender and power in
the workplace.

Understanding Sexual
Harassment of Women at Work
From the beginnings of their journey into employment, women have
invariably experienced sexual harassment in the workplace, whether as
6 C. JULIOS

indentured servants in the 1600s, industrial workers in the 1800s or

skilled professionals in the 1900s, and the present day (Segrave, 1994).
Not until the mid-1970s, however, the sexual harassment problem
became a matter of public concern, particularly in developed liberal soci-
eties such the UK and the USA (Sedley & Benn, 1984). In 1975, for
instance, the Women’s Section of the Human Affairs Program at Cornell
University conducted what was reported to be the first questionnaire ever
solely devoted to the issue of sexual harassment (Segrave, 1994, p. 199).
At the time, out of a total of 155 female respondents, 70% had ‘personally
experienced some form of harassment’, and 92% called it ‘a serious prob-
lem’ (Segrave, 1994, p. 199). The Cornell study, moreover, concluded
that ‘75 percent of the time that the harassment was ignored it eventu-
ally worsened’ (Segrave, 1994, p. 199). In January 1976, a subsequent
survey in Redbook, a national women’s magazine, revealed that ‘of the
9,000 women who replied, over 90% had some personal experience of
sexual harassment’ (Sedley & Benn, 1984, p. 22). Since then, countless
research studies in the UK, the USA and elsewhere have gone on to map
out the global extent of this intractable social problem, and the under-
lying attitudes driving it (Crouch, 2001; Newman, 2017; Sedley & Benn,
1984). The numerous accounts of sexual offences depicted in this book
alone illustrate how sexual harassment can easily thrive in workplaces,
particular when gendered power imbalances are institutionalised. The
high-profile cases of perpetrators within Westminster and Hollywood’s
powerful elites exemplify the everyday plight of female employees, who
are typically afforded a lower status, less power and remuneration than
their male counterparts (Criss, 2017).
As public awareness of the scale of sexual harassment has grown over
time, so have the varied responses to it by national governments, and their
individual legal frameworks. Zippel, (2006), for instance, explains how
case law on sexual harassment first developed in the USA, Canada, the UK
and Australia from the late 1970s, whereas most European Union (EU)
member states would not follow suit until the early 1990s (Zippel, 2006,
p. 17). Elsewhere, despite the existence of gender-specific laws, nearly
two-thirds of countries in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA)
continue to ‘lack legislation on sexual harassment, rape or domestic
violence’ (OECD, 2014, p. 43). Within the MENA region, moreover,
marital rape is still not recognised in certain countries; whereas in others,
‘a rapist can escape punishment if he marries the victim’ (OECD, 2014,
p. 43). Against this backdrop, gender equality laws across the globe
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 7

have come to reflect different understandings of the sexual harassment

phenomenon by individual states. As a result, a range of different civil
and criminal remedies have evolved to hold perpetrators and organisa-
tions accountable for transgressions (Zippel, 2006). Despite national and
regional idiosyncrasies, however, common ground can be found under
the EU’s Equal Treatment Directive (European Union) (2002/73/EC of
23 September 2002), which broadly describes sexual harassment as:

any form of unwanted verbal, non-verbal or physical conduct of a sexual

nature … with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a person,
in particular when creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating
or offensive environment’. (Zippel, 2006, p. 19)

Likewise, the United Nations (UN) Declaration on the Elimination of

Violence against Women in 1993 considers ‘sexual harassment and intimi-
dation at work’ as manifestations of wider violence against women (VAW)
(UN OHCHR, 1993). The latter is seen as encompassing a broad range
of practices involving ‘physical, sexual and psychological violence’ such as
battering, domestic abuse, rape, trafficking and prostitution; as the UN
states:

For the purposes of this Declaration, the term “violence against women”
means any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result
in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including
threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether
occurring in public or in private life. (UN OHCHR, 1993, Article 1)

Given the scope of this book, any discussion about the framing of
sexual harassment must naturally focus on the British experience. This
volume therefore understands the term in line with the statutory defi-
nition of ‘sexual harassment’ enshrined in the UK’s Equality Act 2010,
which refers to any ‘unwanted conduct of a sexual nature’ (Hansard,
2010, c. 15, s. 26, pt. 2 (2), pp. 13–14). In legal terms, workplace sexual
harassment is understood to mainly come from three sources, namely:
employers, fellow employees and third parties such as clients, customers
and business associates (Fawcett Society, 2018, p. 44). As Sedley and
Benn (1984, p. 6) highlighted over three decades ago, sexual harass-
ment in working settings may still comprise ‘repeated, unreciprocated
and unwelcome comments, looks, jokes, suggestions or physical contact
8 C. JULIOS

that might threaten a woman’s job security or create a stressful or intim-

idating working environment’. A recent four-month investigation by the
Financial Times into sexual harassment allegations in the UK Parliament
illustrates such behaviour (Hughes, 2018). Published in 2018, it unveiled
how over thirty Westminster staffers, interns and party volunteers across
the board had shared their experiences of sexual harassment at work.
Among the various accounts depicted, the story of Lucy provides a case
in point (Hughes, 2018). A young woman in her early twenties, Lucy had
been working for a Conservative MP for two years, and during that time,
he regularly subjected her to sexual harassment. She recalls how:

He would talk quite openly about his sexual exploits and bringing people
back into the office … He told me he slept with other researchers in our
office, on my desk, on my keyboard … He would joke about the protein
shakes in the fridge, and how they were “phallic shakes” I could masturbate
with. (Lucy cited in Hughes, 2018)

Despite her boss’s conduct, Lucy felt powerless to file a complaint

against him, largely due to lack of institutional support both within his
own political party and wider Parliament. She eventually left her post
(Hughes, 2018). ‘It really was sexual harassment’, Lucy would later recall
(Hughes, 2018).
Workplace conduct such as the one Lucy describes may, in turn, esca-
late into behaviour located within the broader spectrum of wrongful
behaviour identified under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Hansard, 2003).
Actions in this category may include ‘rape’ as non-consensual penetra-
tive sex; ‘sexual assault’ involving unwanted sexual touching; as well as
causing an individual to engage in ‘sexual activity without consent’, for
example, when performing forced oral sex (Hansard, 2003, c. 42, pt.
1, s. 1–4, pp. 1–3). As the myriad of cases described in this volume
shows, individuals experiencing sexual harassment at work may also fall
prey to ‘victimisation’ (Hansard, 2010; c. 15, pt. 2, s. 27, p. 14); thus,
being at risk of threats and detrimental treatment, if they choose to speak
up. None of those interviewed for the Financial Times investigation into
MPs sexual misconduct, for instance, were prepared to go on the record
or allow their abusers to be publicly named, for fear of repercussions
(Hughes, 2018).
Against this backdrop, the practices associated with the sexual harass-
ment of women in the workplace are unsurprisingly seen by many as
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 9

a matter of sex discrimination (Crouch, 2001). Mackinnon (1979), for

instance, has explored the links between sexual harassment and the
employment rights of women. She explains how:

Sexual harassment threatens women in their jobs … It is not intrinsically

non-work related because it is sexual. When it has an impact upon funda-
mental employment decisions and upon the workplace atmosphere, sexual
harassment is discrimination in employment. (MacKinnon, 1979, p. 208)

Over four decades ago, the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (Hansard,
1975) already described unfavourable conduct towards women as
breaching universal gender equality principles. Consequently, ‘A person
discriminates against a woman … if – on the ground of her sex he treats
her less favourably than he treats or would treat a man’ (Hansard, 1975,
c. 65, pt. 1, s. 1–1, p. 1). Similarly, in the USA, Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act 1964 prohibits sex discrimination in employment (Crouch,
2001). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (1980) Guide-
lines, furthermore, refers to the existence of a’ Hostile Environment’,
when sexual harassment is used ‘as a basis for employment decisions’
affecting an individual (Zippel, 2006, p. 19). In other words, the hiring,
retention and promotion of women at work may be made dependent on
their complying with sexual demands. A situation, only too familiar, for
instance, to the many survivors of Weinstein’s alleged sexual offences in
the film industry (Davies & Khomami, 2018). Despite widespread recog-
nition of the gender equality principles relating to sexual harassment here
outlined, the term remains contested. Any definition of an act of sexual
harassment will ultimately depend on ‘how a woman perceives it’, as
distinct, for instance, from ‘general sexism at work’ (Sedley & Benn,
1984, p. 6). Not only do victims of sexual harassment view their expe-
riences in different ways, but so, too do the perpetrators of such offences.
Most UK MPs publicly accused of sexual transgressions, for example,
have strongly denied that any wrongdoing took place; while, others,
like suspended Labour MP John Woodcock, simply refused to collab-
orate with inquiries into alleged sexual harassment (Allegretti, 2018b;
Syal, 2013). Even accused MPs who have accepted and corroborated
their victims’ accounts will typically refute they ever engaged in any
sexual misconduct. Such is the case of International Trade Minister, Mark
Garnier, who was accused by his former Assistant, Caroline Edmondson
of referring to her as ‘sugar tits’, as well as encouraging her to buy sex
10 C. JULIOS

toys (Stewart & Walker, 2017). Despite accepting her version of events,
Garnier still maintained that his behaviour did not amount to sexual
harassment (Gelblum, 2017; Stewart & Walker, 2017). Likewise, Harvey
Weinstein, now a convicted rapist serving a 23-year jail term, argues that
he and his victims may have experienced ‘different truths’ of what tran-
spired between them (Aratani & Pilkington, 2020; Durkin, 2018). At
the time of writing, he continues to contest multiple claims of historical
sexual harassment and abuse levelled against him. Given the complexity
inherent in defining, framing and recognising sexual harassment, any
attempt to study this phenomenon must include theoretical approaches
able to address its many facets. As the following section explains, this
book draws on intersectional feminist lens to that end.

An Intersectional Feminist Perspective

In the wake of the #MeToo movement, few would dispute that the
sexual transgressions exposed in Hollywood, Westminster and elsewhere
are symptomatic of an endemic and intractable social problem. As Zippel
(2006, p. 14) has put it, ‘workplace sexual harassment did not occur acci-
dentally but resulted from women’s lower status and unequal pay’ over
time. The global scale of sexual misconduct unveiled to date is largely
seen as the outcome of an entrenched patriarchal mindset that has long
sought to objectivise and control women (Crouch, 2001; MacKinnon,
1979; Zippel, 2006). Drawing on an intersectional feminist perspec-
tive (Carastathis, 2014; Crenshaw, 1989, 1991; Nash, 2008) allows this
book to illustrate the many complexities and tensions inherent in the
practice of sexual harassment at work. It also affords the volume a
women-centred perspective that acknowledges their marginalised posi-
tion in society. Factors such as gender, ethnicity, social class, patriarchal
attitudes and widespread sexism are known to shape power dynamics in
the workplace, to the detriment of women (Boyle, 2019; Phipps, 2020;
Stockdale, 1996). Whether the world of politics or the film industry, insti-
tutionalised gender inequalities invariably give way to the exploitation of
women, particularly those in the most vulnerable positions. As Labour
MP Lucy Powell notes, ‘It’s the attitudes and the power inequalities’ that
are at the core of such gender disparities, ‘whether it’s [in] Hollywood,
the BBC or Westminster’ (Powell cited in Stewart and Walker, 2017).
She moreover reasons that, when there are ‘many, many, many people
desperate to work in a place’, who rely on others for their livelihood,
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 11

abuse of power can easily thrive (Powell cited in Stewart and Walker,
2017). The numerous examples of sexual harassment portrayed in this
book clearly show that every industry, organisation and sector within the
larger labour market is susceptible to such unequal outcomes. Within
the academic literature, ‘feminist institutionalist’ research furthermore
illustrates the ways in which organisational cultures, structures and rules
continue to privilege men to the detriment of women (Collier & Raney,
2018; Krook, 2018; Lovenduski, 2014; Raney & Collier, 2021; Verge,
2020). Violence against women in political settings is accordingly seen
as part of a ‘continuum’ of gendered violence present in society and
the wider workplace (Kelly, 1988). As such, sexual harassment in poli-
tics seems no different from that experienced by women in other areas
of work, with the associated detrimental impact on their well-being and
professional prospects. Given the specific nature of public office, however,
the targeting of female elected officials and parliamentary staff carries with
it additional and far-reaching consequences not found in other occu-
pations. Unlike female workers elsewhere, women MPs are voted into
Parliament by their fellow citizens. They accordingly not only represent
their constituents and political parties, but also embody fundamental egal-
itarian principles upon which the liberal democracies they live in are built.
Staff working in legislatures, in turn, enable MPs to discharge their duties.
Sexual harassment of female parliamentarians, therefore, poses a broader
threat to women’s rights, political participation and the viability of demo-
cratic systems of government. Highlighting the unique position of female
MPs’ as victims of sexual harassment, Verge reasons that:

Sexism and sexual harassment provoke feelings of humiliation, anger,

sadness, stress and anxiety, thereby affecting their [women MPs and staff
members’] ability to work normally, as is the case of female workers in
other fields. While these forms of gender-based violence are structural in
contemporary societies, when they become ‘the cost of doing politics’
for women MPs and parliamentary staff, the foundations of democracy
are undermined as it impairs their contribution under equal conditions
to political debates and may cause their retreating from politics or fore-
going of career opportunities, thereby infringing women’s right to political
participation. This is why international organisations view these miscon-
ducts as integrating the continuum of violence against women in politics.
(Verge, 2020, p. 2)
12 C. JULIOS

Similarly, Krook argues that violence aimed at women in politics

is merely a ‘gendered version of already-recognised forms of political
violence’ (Krook, 2020, chp. 1). Yet, she contends that the distinct nature
of politics sets this practice apart from others, because:

it specifically aims to exclude women as women from the political sphere

via dynamics of structural, cultural, and symbolic violence. Theorizing the
phenomenon in relation to these forms of violence also explains why,
until recently, it has remained largely ‘normalized’ and hidden from view.
(Krook, 2020, chp. 1)

While the use of violence ‘as a tool to exclude women from polit-
ical life’ is well-documented (Krook, 2020, chp. 6), the systematic
study of gender-based violence in the political realm and the rapidly
emerging discipline of Violence Against Women in Politics (VAWP) have
only surfaced in recent years (Krook, 2020, 2021; Kuperberg, 2018;
Lovenduski, 2014; UN Women, 2021). Growing interest in women’s
experiences of sexual harassment in public office has coincided with other
related social developments including, ‘rising levels of incivility in world
politics, bolstered by advances in communications technologies, as well
as increased levels of female political engagement around the world’
(Krook, 2020, chp. 6). As a result, politics and sexual harassment are no
longer seen as separate spheres in the lives of female politicians every-
where, but rather as part of an existing spectrum of violence against
women (Krook, 2020; UN Women, 2021). Whether in British polit-
ical institutions or international parliaments, the sexual harassment of
females MPs and parliamentary staff points to prevailing misogynistic
organisational cultures that continue to perpetuate sex discrimination and
gender inequality (Krook, 2020, 2021). By highlighting the experiences
of women in UK politics, the present volume positions itself firmly within
this emerging literature, while making a timely contribution to knowledge
of the British case.
It is against this backdrop that the book’s intersectional feminist
model furthermore provides an effective theoretical tool to conceptualise
women’s lives as ‘constructed by multiple, intersecting systems of oppres-
sion’, which consistently disadvantage them (Carastathis, 2014, p. 304;
Crenshaw, 1989, 1991). The term ‘intersectionality’ was originally coined
by Crenshaw (1989), a leading legal scholar, as part of a wider academic
drive towards developing critical race theory during the late 1980s and
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 13

early 1990s. Despite black women having contributed to contemporary

feminist thought and activism from at least the early nineteenth century,
they have largely remained at the margins of mainstream Western femi-
nism (Bryson, 2003, p. 226). One main flaw of mainstream feminism
and ‘white women’s privilege’, Bryson (2003, p. 227) claims, has been
to assume that the generic banner of ‘women’ included ‘all women’,
regardless of their social and ethnic background. In reality, however, this
strand of feminism has mainly been associated with the experiences, values
and aspirations of white women, and specifically, middle-class feminists.
Their vision of the ‘sisterhood’ has largely either ignored the needs of
their fellow black female counterparts or treated them as marginal and
‘different’ (Bryson, 2003). In contrast, Crenshaw’s intersectional perspec-
tive has sought to fully recognise the experiences of Black women, as
well as challenging the ‘law’s purported colour-blindness, neutrality, and
objectivity’ (Nash, 2008, p. 2). Crenshaw (1989, p. 157) argues that
mainstream white feminism and anti-racist policy discourses have indeed
failed to account for Black women’s experiences, because they overlook
‘the multidimensionality of Black women’s lives’. In her own words:

Black women are sometimes excluded from feminist theory and antiracist
policy discourse because both are predicated on a discrete set of experiences
that often does not accurately reflect the interaction of race and gender …
Because the intersectional experience is greater than the sum of racism
and sexism, any analysis that does not take intersectionality into account
cannot sufficiently address the particular manner in which Black women
are subordinated. (Crenshaw, 1989, p. 140)

From the outset, the intersection of gender and race has been central
to the notion of ‘intersectionality’; for, it has been used to signify how
these two factors jointly shape the employment experiences of Black
women. Crenshaw (1991, p. 1244) contends that Black women’s ‘inter-
sectional identity’ sees them being marginalised on account both of their
gender and ethnicity; that is, as ‘women’ and ‘of colour’. She, therefore,
rejects mainstream feminist and anti-racist discourses that are postulated
on ‘single-axis frameworks’, which merely respond to either the gender
or race parameters separately (Crenshaw, 1991, p. 1244). Such discourses
seemingly fail to capture the ‘intersection of racism and sexism factors
into Black women’s lives’ (Crenshaw, 1991, p. 1244). Instead, Cren-
shaw (1991) calls for a new intersectionality paradigm able to address
14 C. JULIOS

the ‘multiple dimensions’ of Black women’s experiences including factors

such as gender, race, social class and sexuality. Not intended as ‘some
new, totalizing theory of identity’; Crenshaw’s approach, nevertheless,
serves to explore how the intersection of race and gender shape ‘struc-
tural, political and representational aspects of violence against women of
colour’ (Crenshaw, 1991, p. 1244). Her focus on such intersections ulti-
mately underlines the need to account for ‘multiple grounds of identity’
inherent to the social reality of Black women (Crenshaw, 1991, p. 1245).
By challenging race and gender binary discourses from feminist and
anti-racist scholarship, Crenshaw’s intersectionality approach has allowed
for the theorising of identity politics in a more complex and nuanced way
(Nash, 2008). Now recognised as a major contribution to the Women’s
Studies field; Crenshaw’s ideas have seen feminist theory claiming that
‘women’s lives are constructed by multiple, intersecting systems of
oppression’ (Carastathis, 2014, p. 304). Intersectionality has moreover
enabled researchers to capture how such disadvantages are experienced
simultaneously; for, the challenges encountered by women in society
are typically manifold (Carastathis, 2014, p. 304). Ultimately, Cren-
shaw’s insight into women’s oppression as encompassing a combination of
multiple, interwoven factors, as opposed to single or binary ones, makes
her model relevant to the experiences of working women everywhere. It is
within this context, that the present volume draws on intersectional femi-
nist theory to explore the complex reality facing female victims of sexual
harassment at work. The book nonetheless acknowledges the inherent
limitations in Crenshaw’s approach. Nash (2008, p. 1), for instance,
has interrogated four key assumptions underpinning intersectionality,
namely: ‘the vague definition of intersectionality’; its ‘lack of a defined
intersectional methodology’; ‘the use of black women as quintessential
intersectional subjects’; and concerns regarding ‘the empirical validity of
intersectionality’. Similarly, Bryson (2003, pp. 231–232) has questioned
the ‘Afrocentric’ framing of black women’s experiences within the inter-
sectionality paradigm. It is not only far from clear who ‘black women’ are;
but the term can marginalise other minority ethnic women such as Asians,
as well as ignoring black women’s own privileged position in US society,
in comparison with that of their peers in other nations (Bryson, 2003,
pp. 231–232). Zack (2005) has furthermore interrogated the inclusivity
claims of intersectionality, while criticising identity politics as divisive. She
argues that intersectionality provides women of colour with a voice only
in so far as they self-identify with this marginalised racial group, thus,
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 15

preventing them from being heard and recognised by other white and
non-white women as ‘women’ (Zack, 2005). Notwithstanding its short-
comings, Crenshaw’s (1989, 1991) intersectionality paradigm has led
to awareness of a wide range of interconnected factors adversely influ-
encing women’s lives, including race and gender as well as age, physical
ability and sexual orientation, among others (Bryson, 2003, p. 230). Her
intersectional feminist model, therefore, provides a suitable theoretical
framework to examine the multitude of overlapping systems of oppres-
sion that shape women’s experiences in the workplace, particularly those
employed in the male-dominated Houses of Parliament.

Methodological Challenges
Given the complexity and interdisciplinary nature of the topic under
study, this book relies on several case studies and content analysis of a
wide range of sources. The latter include, academic and grey literature,
online media reports and newspapers articles, broadcast interviews, videos
and documentaries, official publications, parliamentary debates, sexual
offences-related legislation and court cases, as well as autobiographical
accounts by survivors of sexual harassment and abuse. Such an array of
sources and narratives allows the volume to capture the many facets,
debates and views inherent to the question of sexual harassment in the
UK Parliament. Predictably, the present work faced various methodolog-
ical challenges broadly in line with the author’s previous research into
Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) (Julios, 2015, 2019) and
the wider literature. Three main areas are worth mentioning here: first,
the difficulties inherent in framing sexual harassment, already identified;
second, the existing knowledge gap regarding sexual offences; and third,
the idiosyncrasies associated with online social movements such as those
relating to the #MeToo campaign. Each of these areas will be briefly
explored next.
Despite decades of gender equality and sexual offences-related legis-
lation (Hansard, 1975, 2003, 2010), the notion of sexual harassment
remains contested. Not only there is no unifying definition upon which
all lawmakers and researchers agree; but victims and perpetrators will have
different understandings of what too place. As Crouch (2001, p. 102)
has indicated, social scientists studying sexual harassment typically report
problems with definitions as well as wider methodological issues such as
‘sampling bias, bias in the reports of respondents, and researcher bias’.
16 C. JULIOS

Within this context, ascertaining what sexual harassment amounts to

and what constitutes free and full consent are fraught with difficulties.
In 2018, for example, the UK’s End Violence Against Women Coali-
tion (EVAW) published a survey on Attitudes to Sexual Consent (EVAW,
2018), which revealed serious gaps in public understanding of consen-
sual sex. With almost 4,000 respondents, the report’s findings showed ‘a
worrying confusion both about what rape is, and how much harm rape
does’ (EVAW, 2018, p. 2). A third of respondents (33%), for instance,
believe that ‘it isn’t usually rape if a woman is pressured into having sex
but there is no physical violence’; while almost a quarter (24%) do not
think that ‘in most cases, sex without consent in long-term relationships
is rape’ (EVAW, 2018, p. 2). Against this background, not being able
to accurately define sexual harassment and abuse has an impact on how
researchers might understand and measure it.
Quantifying the actual extent of sexual harassment presents, in turn,
further methodological challenges. Consistent with wider research into
VAW and so-called honour-based violence (Julios, 2015, 2019), the
study of sexual offences is invariably afflicted with a knowledge gap. The
secrecy, stigma and serious implications often surrounding sexual harass-
ment and abuse, together with a persistent under-reporting of cases by
victims, combine to produce flawed data. As a result, researchers often
rely on underestimates of what is usually believed to be a much wider
problem (Julios, 2015, 2019). Such knowledge gap has implications
concerning both what it is known about sexual harassment, as well as
how information is gathered, analysed and presented (Crouch, 2001).
Beyond these obstacles, the interdisciplinary character of sexual harass-
ment adds a further layer of complexity to the study of this global
phenomenon. A combination of hotly debated social issues and femi-
nist debates relating to patriarchy, female sexuality and gender inequality
in the workplace will inform any inquiry into sexual harassment. One
such debate relates to the nature and unprecedented impact of the online
movement #MeToo. The study of #MeToo as part of the research for
this book presents a final set of challenges associated with the study
of virtual ethnographies and social media (McCaughey & Ayers, 2003).
These hurdles typically relate to the sheer volume of information available
online, the constant stream of newly created content and the reliability of
the sources populating cyberspace (McCaughey & Ayers, 2003). Given
the scope of the volume, only a glimpse of pertinent content on relevant
social media platforms such as Twitter and YouTube can be afforded.
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 17

Structure of the Book

The book comprises seven chapters, each dealing with different dimen-
sions of the sexual harassment phenomenon. A summary of the contents
follows next.

Chapter 1. Introduction: The Politics of Sexual Harassment

This chapter introduces the practice of sexual harassment in the workplace
and provides a background to its nature, scope and legal status under
British law. In line with the statutory definition of the concept enshrined
in the Equality Act 2010, the book understands sexual harassment as any
‘unwanted conduct of a sexual nature’ (Hansard, 2010, c. 15, s. 26, pt. 2
(2), pp. 13–14). Given the wide range of sexual offences depicted in the
book, sexual harassment is located within the broad spectrum of wrongful
behaviour identified under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (Hansard, 2003).
This may accordingly include: ‘rape’ as non-consensual penetrative sex;
‘sexual assault’ involving unwanted sexual touching; and causing an indi-
vidual to engage in ‘sexual activity without consent’ such as forced oral
sex (Hansard, 2003, c. 42, pt. 1, s. 1–4, pp. 1–3). With many of these
offences allegedly perpetrated in the UK Parliament and its devolved legis-
latures, the unequal status of women working in such male-dominated
environments is examined. Drawing on an intersectional feminist frame-
work (Crenshaw, 1991; Nash, 2008), the chapter considers an array
of complex social structures and systems of subordination that invari-
ably disadvantage women, while privileging men (Carastathis, 2014).
Factors such as gender, ethnicity and social class, together with a domi-
nant patriarchal culture, institutional gender inequality and deep-rooted
sexism are known to shape power dynamics in the workplace (Stock-
dale, 1996). Such factors are vividly exposed within the confines of the
Houses of Parliament and its fellow devolved administrations in the UK
(Bagehot, 2017; Feklina, 2016). The chapter therefore reflects on the
gender dynamics of the British Parliament as a workplace and the condi-
tions that allow sexual harassment to flourish. Lastly, it provides a critical
analysis of the book’s methodology, including its intersectional feminist
approach, as well as a breakdown of the volume’s contents and chapters.
18 C. JULIOS

Chapter 2. Understanding Sexual Harassment in the #MeToo Era

No account of sexual harassment in modern times can be complete
without reference to the #MeToo movement and its far-reaching impact
(Perkins, 2017). This chapter accordingly provides a contextual account
of the rise of #MeToo as an international gender equality campaign
supporting those affected by sexual harassment and violence (Brockes,
2018; Perkins, 2017). Originally articulated by African-American civil
rights activist Tarana Burke in 2006, the slogan ‘me too’ was meant as
a rallying cry to support young minority ethic survivors of sexual abuse
(Brockes, 2018). Years later, social media would turn Burke’s initial motto
into a global campaign, largely credited with giving those affected by
sexual transgressions a voice. To fully understand the wider significance
of #MeToo, the chapter chronicles the events surrounding Harvey Wein-
stein’s sexual exploitation scandal in Hollywood, during the Autumn of
2017 (Perkins, 2017). The uncovering of his numerous sex offences
would not only lead to Weinstein’s downfall, but became a catalyst for
the inception of the #MeToo phenomenon (McKinley, 2018). In the
first instance, the chapter thus traces the Pulitzer Prize-winning exposés
of Weinstein’s serial sex offending, by The New York Times (Kantor &
Twohey, 2017) and The New Yorker (Farrow, 2017) in October 2017
(BBC, 2018). Then, the rise of #MeToo swiftly follows. On 12 October
2017, Hollywood actress Rose McGowan (2018) publicly accused Wein-
stein on Twitter of having raped her in the past; an allegation he strongly
denied (BBC, 2018). Three days later, fellow Hollywood actress Alyssa
Milano posted a tweet urging those affected by sexual wrongdoings to
share their stories online using the ‘me too’ slogan (Sayej, 2017). The
next day, about 55,000 replies to her message had been received and
the #MeToo hashtag was already trending at number one on Twitter
(Sayej, 2017). By mid-October, 16 million people alone had posted under
#MeToo in the wake of McGowan’s online revelation (Perkins, 2017).
In the following weeks and months, #MeToo would becoming active on
Twitter in 85 countries, used more than 12 million times as well as posted
85 million times on Facebook (Brockes, 2018; Sayej, 2017). From Holly-
wood’s motion pictures to politics and businesses, no industry would
prove immune to the practice of sexual harassment. By December 2017,
the far-reaching impact of the #MeToo movement and its so-called Silent
Breakers was recognised by Time’s magazine, which named them collec-
tively ‘Person of the Year 2017’ (Zacharek et al., 2017). The chapter thus
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 19

critically examines the growth and significance of this feminist-led collec-

tive, as well as the shortcomings inherent in such as a diverse, ‘large and
fast-moving movement’ (Brockes, 2018).

Chapter 3. From #MeToo to the Palace of ‘Sexminster’

The #MeToo movement not only exposed sexual misconduct in Holly-
wood and workplaces worldwide, but significantly at the core of the
British political establishment. This chapter hence examines the scale of
the sexual harassment problem in the UK Parliament. With Westmin-
ster largely seen as a male-dominated institution that allows policymakers
to enjoy a ‘position of unusual power’ (Feklina, 2016; Hughes, 2018),
victims of abuse seem typically left defenceless. This has invariably been
the case for many survivors who, during mid-Autumn in 2017 and there-
after publicly described sexual wrongdoings at the hands of British MPs
(Watts, 2017). The chapter chronicles a catalogue of abuse allegations
mainly by female politicians, activists and Westminster staff, in the wake of
similar revelations by their #MeToo peers. Consistent with Hollywood’s
film industry and innumerable institutions worldwide, sexual misconduct
in the UK Parliament was to prove endemic (Bagehot, 2017). The tide
of revelations that originally came to light cut across the entire polit-
ical spectrum: from the Conservative Party’s so-called sex pest dossier
of 36 offending MPs (Walker, 2017; Morley, 2017), to members of the
Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats involved in misconduct (Stewart,
2017; Tapsfield, 2017; Ferguson, 2017). Buoyed by the #MeToo move-
ment, social media was to be instrumental in the drive to uncover sexual
malpractice in Westminster, with hashtags such as #TorySleaze36 and
#LabourToo having long gone viral (Twitter, ). Mirroring the Hollywood
experience, a string of powerful men such as Sir Michael Fallon, Defence
Secretary; Damian Green, First Secretary of State; and Mark Garnier,
International Trade Minister were either suspended over wrongdoings,
dismissed or resigned from their posts (Steward & Mason, 2017; Watts &
Cowburn, 2017; Agerholm, 2018). With more survivors increasingly
coming forward with claims of historical sex offences, attention inevitably
focused on Westminster’s conspiratorial culture aimed at silencing victims.
In October 2017, for instance, Bex Bailey, a Labour activist, revealed
she had been raped at a past Labour Party event, but discouraged from
reporting it by senior staff (Watts, 2017). The chapter finally considers
the impact of the #MeToo movement in exposing Westminster’s sexual
20 C. JULIOS

harassment problem and the wider implications for the British political
establishment.

Chapter 4. UK’s Devolution and Sexual Harassment: Scotland

and Wales Too
In line with the Houses of Parliament, the problem of sexual harassment
has also proved prevalent in the devolved institutions of government,
particularly in Scotland and Wales. As for Northern Ireland (NI), it
has reportedly the highest rate of workplace-related sexual harassment
in Britain (Buck, 2017). However, the recent three-year absence of a
sitting government in the NI Assembly (Kelly, 2019; Northern Ireland
Assembly, 2021; Sky News, 2020) meant that this chapter can only provide
a meaningful examination of the Scottish and Welsh experiences. With
regard to Scotland, following media reports of ‘sexual harassment and
sexist behaviour’ in the Scottish Parliament at Holyrood, in late 2017;
the Scottish Parliament commissioned a survey to ascertain the scale of
the problem (Scottish Parliament, 2018). The results, published on 3
March 2018, revealed that a fifth (20%) of staff had ‘experienced such
behaviour while working in Parliament’; with 30% of those affected being
women compared to only 6% of men (Scottish Parliament, 2018). At the
time, Scotland’s First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, declared the outcome
as ‘unacceptable’ and stated her intention that ‘our national parliament
should set a positive example as a place of work with the highest stan-
dards of behaviour’ (Brooks, 2018). To this end, a Parliamentary Joint
Working Group went on to identify a number of areas intended to
address sexual transgressions. These included, education and training for
staff, improved reporting procedures, additional support for victims and
survivors as well as new monitoring mechanisms (Scottish Parliament,
2018). By mid-June 2018, similar media allegations of ‘sexual assault and
bullying’ in the Welsh Assembly had revealed inappropriate behaviour to
be a serious problem (BBC News, 2018). A staff survey by the Assembly
Commission between April and May 2018 found that 37 people (out of
128 respondents) had experienced incidents of ‘inappropriate behaviour’,
and a further 37 had encountered or witnessed such behaviour, but
did not report it (BBC, 2018). This was despite the Welsh Assembly
having recently approved a new ‘Dignity and Respect Policy’ underlining
the high standards of conduct expected from Assembly Members, and
those associated with the Welsh legislature (National Assembly for Wales,
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 21

2018). Against this backdrop, the chapter will examine the extent of
sexual harassment in the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly, as
well as their different responses to it.

Chapter 5. Cleaning up the Houses of Parliament

With the scale of sexual misconduct within the UK’s political establish-
ment already apparent, this chapter will critically examine the British
government’s strategy to tacking the problem. The last quarter of 2017
can be said to have witnessed Westminster’s ‘sleaze scandal’ morphing
into a British version of Hollywood’s Weinstein debacle (Bagehot,
2017). As the issue of sexual transgressions within Houses of Parliament
remained firmly on the spotlight, measures to address the prevailing ‘boys’
own locker room culture’ were speedily sought (Maidment, 2017). On 4
November 2017, for instance, media reports described how PM Theresa
May had launched a ‘new Conservative code of conduct’ in response
to the ongoing Westminster sex scandal (Allegretti, 2017). Aimed at
strengthening existing mechanisms, the new code was meant to ensure a
transparent and independent grievance procedure for all Westminster staff
(Allegretti, 2017). This was followed in the new year 2018, by the publi-
cation of a raft of successive public policy inquiries and reports addressing
sexual harassment practices in the workplace (EHRC, 2018; Hansard,
2018a, 2018b). In January 2018, example, The Fawcett Society (2018),
published their Sex Discrimination Law Review calling for more effec-
tive legislative measures to safeguard victims of abuse across the board,
including in the workplace, and the recognition of misogyny as a hate
crime. Two months later, the Equality and Human Rights Commission
(EHRC) (2018) published the Turning the tables: Ending sexual harass-
ment at work report. It reflected on survivors’ experiences of abuse and
called for greater protection of employees’ rights, together with changes
in organisational cultures, as well as ending the misuse of Non-disclosure
Agreements (NDAs) to silence victims (EHRC, 2018). The report was
followed in July 2018, by the House of Commons Women and Equalities
Committee’ Sexual Harassment in The Workplace, Fifth Report of Session
2017–19 (Hansard, 2018a). In an attempt to put the issue of Westmin-
ster’s workplace abuse at the top of the political agenda, MPs emphasised
the role played by employers and regulators in guaranteeing employees’
rights (Hansard, 2018a). Remedial measures included effective enforce-
ment processes such as codes of conduct, and once again ending abuse
22 C. JULIOS

of NDAs (Hansard, 2018a). In October 2018, amid continuing allega-

tions of transgressions and intimidation at Westminster (Heffer, 2018),
an independent inquiry led by former High Court Judge, Dame Laura
Cox DBE, published The Bullying and Harassment of House of Commons
Staff: Independent Inquiry Report (Cox, 2018). Specifically aimed at
Parliament, it built on the earlier reports’ recommendations, while consid-
ering improvements to established policies and procedures to address
wrongdoings. Finally, on 18 December 2018, the Government Response
to the [WEC] Committee Fifth Report of Session 2017–19 was published
(Hansard, 2018b). Despite such efforts, the British political establishment
has long come under criticism for their perceived laxity and inaction over
its sexual harassment problem. As far back as 2016, a report by Professor
Sarah Childs titled The Good Parliament (Childs, 2016) already identified
fundamental flaws in the membership, infrastructure and culture of West-
minster. These ensured it remains a ‘disproportionately white, male and
elite’ institution (Childs, 2016; University of Bristol, 2016). The present
chapter therefore reflects on the effectiveness of the newly proposed policy
changes meant to eradicate sexual harassment in Parliament.

Chapter 6. Sexual Harassment Beyond British Politics

With the #MeToo movement having opened the floodgates to millions
of revelations of workplace misconduct worldwide, this chapter exam-
ines the wider implications of the so-called ‘Weinstein effect’ beyond
Hollywood and Westminster (Clark, 2017). In line with the prevailing
global trend, no institution has proved immune to sexual harassment,
from the world of politics, films and media, to sports, business, the charity
sector and academia (Snowdon, 2017). The chapter thus explores some
recent high-profile examples from various industries in Britain, the US
and abroad. In November 2017, for instance, the UK’s legal profession
came under scrutiny when media reports revealed that female lawyers at
the prominent human rights law firm Matrix Chambers had complained
about common ‘sexual harassment, comments and innuendo’ by senior
male colleagues (O’Neill, 2017). At the time, research showed that two-
thirds of female lawyers typically experienced sexual harassment at work
(Stanley, 2017). In January 2018, the spotlight turned to Britain’s high-
flying corporate executive elite. On this occasion, an investigation by
the Financial Times newspaper had exposed widespread sexual harass-
ment, groping and propositioning of female hostesses attending a coveted
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 23

men-only fundraising dinner hosted by The Presidents Club, a charity, in

London (Marriage, 2018). The annual black-tie event was attended by
360 men from British businesses, politics, finance and the entertainment
industries, together with 130 hired female hostesses under instructions
to wear ‘skimpy black outfits with matching underwear and high heels’
(Marriage, 2018). Following a public backlash, The Presidents Club
went on to announce its closure (Thompson & Marriage, 2018). Like-
wise, in the United States, the USA Gymnastics Team was engulfed in
what is seen as the biggest sex-abuse scandal in the country’s sporting
history, during 2017 (Shugerman, 2018; Sturges, 2018). It involved the
systematic sexual abuse of hundreds of young female athletes by 40-
year-old former US Olympic doctor, Larry Nassar, for over two decades
(Shugerman, 2018; Sturges, 2018). In January 2018, he was sentenced
to between 40 and up to 175 years in prison (Park, 2018). By then many
of his victims had shared their stories online as part of the wider #MeToo
movement (Correa, 2018). Finally, in January 2018, an investigation by
The Guardian newspaper found sexual harassment and assault seemingly
rife at the United Nations (UN) (Ratcliffe, 2018). A culture of silence
within this prominent intergovernmental organisation (IGO) had allowed
perpetrators to act with impunity, while a flawed grievance procedures saw
victims’ complaints ignored (Ratcliffe, 2018). By May 2018, with 54 alle-
gations reported involving 66 victims, the UN Secretary-General António
Guterres committed to a ‘“zero tolerance” policy for sexual exploita-
tion and abuse’ (UN News, 2018). The chapter therefore considers the
broader extent of workplace sexual harassment and abuse beyond West-
minster and Hollywood. It also reflects on how the #MeToo movement
has focused unprecedented attention on institutional gender inequality
across the board, while empowering those affected by it to speak up.

Chapter 7. Conclusion: Heeding the #MeToo Lessons?

This chapter draws on the key themes and findings of the book, while
considering current challenges faced by the UK Parliament in its efforts
to eradicate sexual harassment. This is particularly the case, given that
Westminster female employees remain vastly outnumbered and outranked
by their male counterparts (Feklina, 2016). In view of the innumer-
able accounts of sexual harassment by female politicians, activist and
Parliamentary staff already documented, the chapter critically examines
persistent institutional barriers to reporting of cases. Successive public
24 C. JULIOS

policy initiatives and independent studies have invariably placed the

burden of responsibility on employers to safeguard their employees’ rights
(EHRC, 2018; Hansard, 2018a; Cox, 2018). The chapter accordingly
assesses the effectiveness of some key public policy recommendations
to address malpractice so far (EHRC, 2018; Hansard, 2018a; Cox,
2018). The chapter furthermore reflects on the prevailing culture of
complicity aimed at silencing victims, and often involving intimidation,
coercion and the use of Non-disclosure Agreements (NDAs) (EHRC,
2018; Hansard, 2018a). New examples of which continue to be reported
daily in the press, including for instance, recent misconduct allegations
levelled against British retail tycoon Sir Phillip Green (Newell, 2018;
Newell et al., 2018). Given the endemic sexual transgressions uncov-
ered by the #MeToo movement, the chapter reflects on the fundamental
cultural change required to address such an intractable global problem.
It also ponders on the difficulties involved in effecting a paradigm shift,
while those in leadership positions remain part of the problem. By exam-
ining the extent of sexual harassment in the UK Parliament against the
backdrop of the #MeToo movement, the book contributes to further
existing knowledge of gender and power dynamics in the modern work-
place. It also points to the lessons learnt from the #MeToo movement in
order to redress the status quo.

Conclusion
A centuries-old practice, sexual harassment in the workplace remains
a contested and challenging social problem. Decades of governmental
policy and legislation in the UK and abroad have yet to produce a univer-
sally accepted definition of this phenomenon. Evolving British social
attitudes have moreover seen public perceptions of what constitutes free
and informed consent between adults change over time. At the same time,
patriarchal organisational cultures, widespread sexism and gender discrim-
ination, such as those found in the Houses of Parliament, continue to
provide a fertile ground for sexual harassment to thrive in. A situation
furthermore compounded by widespread under-reporting of cases due
to the very nature of the offences, lack of support for victims and fears
of retribution. As the contrasting narratives of those affected by sexual
transgressions illustrate, victims and perpetrators of alleged offences will
typically dispute each other’s accounts of what took place. Consequently,
ascertaining the nature and extent of sexual harassment in general, and
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 25

in the UK Parliament in particular, is fraught with difficulties. Against

this backdrop, the book’s exploration of sexual harassment through an
intersectional feminist lens serves to illustrate this phenomenon’s complex
nature. It more importantly highlights the multiple disadvantages expe-
rienced by working women everywhere, as well as the institutional and
socio-cultural structures that perpetuate their oppression. Given that the
problem remains endemic within the British political establishment, the
book raises serious questions about the dynamics of gender and power in
the modern workplace.

Bibliography
Abbott, D. (2019). About Diane. Diane Abbott. http://www.dianeabbott.org.
uk/about.aspx. Accessed 16 May 2019.
Agerholm, H. (2018, January 9). Mark Garnier sacked: Tory minister who
admitted asking secretary to buy sex toys loses job. The Independent. https://
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mark-garnier-cabinet-reshuffle-
sacked-sex-toys-international-trade-lose-job-a8149271.html. Accessed 25
May 2018.
Allegretti, A. (2017, November 4). Theresa May launches new Conservative
code of conduct after Westminster scandal. Sky News. https://news.sky.com/
story/theresa-may-launches-new-conservative-code-of-conduct-after-westmi
nster-scandal-11111721. Accessed 4 April 2021.
Allegretti, A. (2018a, February 8). MPs could be expelled for sexual abuse and
harassment under new ‘game-changing’ rules. Sky News. https://news.sky.
com/story/mps-could-be-expelled-for-sexual-abuse-and-harassment-under-
new-game-changer-rules-11240799. Accessed 16 October 2018.
Allegretti, A. (2018b, June 24). Labour MP John Woodcock slams ‘tainted’
sexual harassment investigation. Sky News. https://news.sky.com/story/lab
our-mp-john-woodcock-slams-tainted-sexual-harassment-investigation-114
15664. Accessed 15 May 2019.
Aratani, L., & Pilkington, E. (2020, March 11). Harvey Weinstein sentenced
to 23 years in prison on rape conviction. The Guardian. https://www.the
guardian.com/world/2020/mar/11/harvey-weinstein-sentencing-rape-con
viction. Accessed 28 April 2020.
Associated Press News. (2018, July 24). Ex-Stanford swimmer appeals sexual
assault conviction. AP NEWS. https://apnews.com/cdfccbc0d515437aae5a6
a3f6db94663. Accessed 19 February 2019.
Bagehot. (2017, November 4). The Palace of Pestminster faces up to accusations
of sexual predation. The Economist. https://www.economist.com/britain/
26 C. JULIOS

2017/11/04/the-palace-of-pestminster-faces-up-to-accusations-of-sexual-pre
dation. Accessed 17 October 2018.
BBC. (2017). ‘Westminster sex scandal: Theresa May calls for “culture of
respect”’. BBC News. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41881125.
Accessed 30 November 2018.
BBC News. (2018, June 19). Assembly harassment survey pretty sobering,
presiding officer says. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-445
33011. Accessed 15 January 2022.
Boyle, K. (2019). #MeToo, Weinstein and feminism [Kindle Paperwhite
version]. Palgrave Pivot. https://www.amazon.co.uk/MeToo-Weinstein-Fem
inism-Karen-Boyle-ebook/dp/B081195WB8/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=%23m
etoo%2C+weinstein+and+feminism&qid=1611045625&sr=8-1. Accessed 19
January 2021.
Brockes, E. (2018, January 15). The G2 interview: Me Too founder Tarana
Burke: ‘You have to use your privilege to serve other people’. The
Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/15/me-too-fou
nder-tarana-burke-women-sexual-assault. Accessed 10 September 2020.
Brooks, L. (2018, March 1). Sturgeon shocked by Holyrood survey on
sexism and abuse. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/
2018/mar/01/sturgeon-shocked-by-holyrood-survey-on-sexism-and-abuse.
Accessed 25 September 2019.
Bryson, V. (2003). Feminist political theory: An introduction (2nd ed.). Palgrave
Macmillan.
Buck, K. (2017, October 19). Northern Ireland has highest rate of sexual
harassment in UK workplace, but no one’s admitting blame. Belfast Telegraph
Digital. https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/nor
thern-ireland-has-highest-rate-of-sexual-harassment-in-uk-workplace-but-no-
ones-admitting-blame-36241154.html. Accessed 20 September 2019.
Carastathis, A. (2014). The concept of intersectionality in feminist theory.
Philosophy Compass, 9(5), 304–314. http://www.academia.edu/4894646/
The_Concept_of_Intersectionality_in_Feminist_Theory. Accessed 17 October
2018.
Childs, S. (2016). The Good parliament. University of Bristol. http://www.
bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/news/2016/july/20%20Jul%20Prof%20S
arah%20Childs%20The%20Good%20Parliament%20report.pdf. Accessed 27
September 2019.
Clark, E. (2017, November 9). The Weinstein effect has tentacles that reach far
beyond Hollywood. ABC. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-09/the-
weinstein-effect-has-tentacles-that-reach-for-the-powerful/9129152. Accessed
30 October 2018.
Collier, C. N., & Raney, T. (2018). Understanding sexism and sexual harassment
in politics: A comparison of Westminster parliaments in Australia, the United
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 27

Kingdom, and Canada. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State

&Society, 25(3), 432–455. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxy024
Correa, C. (2018, January 25). The #MeToo moment: For U.S. Gymnasts,
Why did justice Take so long? The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.
com/2018/01/25/us/the-metoo-moment-for-us-gymnasts-olympics-nassar-
justice.html. Accessed 30 October 2018.
Cox, L. (2018). The bullying and harassment of house of commons staff: Indepen-
dent inquiry report, Dame Laura Cox DBE. https://www.parliament.uk/glo
balassets/documents/conduct-in-parliament/dame-laura-cox-independent-
inquiry-report.pdf. Accessed 28 March 2021.
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex:
A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, eeminist theory,
and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1 (8)),
139–67. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=
1052&context=uclf. Accessed 16 May 2019.
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity politics,
and Violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–
1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
Criss, D. (2017, November 1). The (incomplete) list of powerful men accused
of sexual harassment after Harvey Weinstein. CNN . https://www.cnn.com/
2017/10/25/us/list-of-accused-after-weinstein-scandal-trnd/index.html.
Accessed 15 February 2019.
Crouch, M. A. (2001). Thinking about sexual harassment: A guide for the
perplexed. Oxford University Press.
Currie, E., Newman, C., & Gale, S. (2017, November 1). Corridors of power:
what it’s really like to be a woman in Westminster. The Telegraph. https://
www-nexis-com.ezproxy.lib.bbk.ac.uk/results/enhdocview.do?docLinkInd=
true&ersKey=23_T28096933749&format=GNBFI&startDocNo=1&result
sUrlKey=0_T28096969603&backKey=20_T28096969604&csi=389195&
docNo=2. Accessed 2 November 2018.
Davies, C., & Khomami, N. (2018, May 25). Harvey Weinstein: The women
who have accused him. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/film/
2017/oct/11/the-allegations-against-harvey-weinstein-what-we-know-so-far.
Accessed 15 January 2022.
Durkin, E. (2018, December 20). Harvey Weinstein: Judge rejects bid to dismiss
sexual assault charges. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/film/
2018/dec/20/harvey-weinstein-court-sexual-assault-case-new-york. Accessed
23 February 2019.
End Violence Against Women (EVAW) Coalition. (2018, December). Attitudes
to sexual consent, research for the end violence against women coalition,
by YouGov. https://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/wp-content/upl
28 C. JULIOS

oads/1-Attitudes-to-sexual-consent-Research-findings-FINAL.pdf. Accessed
15 January 2022.
Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC). (2018). Turning the
tables: Ending sexual harassment at work. https://www.equalityhumanrights.
com/sites/default/files/ending-sexual-harassment-at-work.pdf. Accessed 26
October 2018.
Farrow, R. (2017, October 23). From aggressive overtures to sexual assault:
Harvey Weinstein’s accusers tell their stories. The New Yorker. https://www.
newyorker.com/news/news-desk/from-aggressive-overtures-to-sexual-ass
ault-harvey-weinsteins-accusers-tell-their-stories. Accessed 17 October 2017.
Fawcett Society. (2018). Sex discrimination law review. https://www.fawcettso
ciety.org.uk/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=e473a103-28c1-4a6c-aa43-
5099d34c0116. Accessed 29 October 2018.
Feklina, A. (2016, March 15). Institutionally sexist? Parliament remains a ‘gentle-
men’s club’, MP says. RT . https://www.rt.com/uk/335566-institutionally-
sexist-parliament-women/. Accessed 20 October 2018.
Ferguson, K. (2017, November 6). Liberal Democrats dragged into the Westmin-
ster sex abuse scandal as it suspends a party member accused of raping a female
activist. Mail Online. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5054573/
Lib-Dems-suspend-member-rape-claim.html. Accessed 25 October 2018.
Gelblum, B. (2017, October 30). Leaked list of conservative party sex pest
sleaze published, shaming THIRTY SIX current Tory MPs. The London
Economic. https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/leaked-list-of-con
servative-party-sex-pest-sleaze-published-shaming-thirty-six-current-tory-mps-
62378/. Accessed 27 February 2021.
Grant, R., & Nash, M. (2020). Homonormativity or queer disidentifi-
cation? Rural Australian bisexual women’s identity politics. Sexualities,
23(4), 592–608. https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy.lib.bbk.ac.uk/doi/
pdf/, https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460719839921
Gupta, R. (2014, June 16). ‘Victim’ vs ‘Survivor’: feminism and language.
openDemocracy. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/victim-vs-sur
vivor-feminism-and-language/. Accessed 2 May 2021.
Hansard. Sex Discrimination Act 1975, c. 65. http://www.legislation.gov.
uk/ukpga/1975/65/pdfs/ukpga_19750065_en.pdf. Accessed 5 November
2019.
Hansard. Sexual Offences Act. (2003). § c. 42 (2003). http://www.legisl
ation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/pdfs/ukpga_20030042_en.pdf. Accessed 19
October 2018.
Hansard. (2010). Equality Act 2010, c. 15. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/
ukpga/2010/15/contents. Accessed 19 October 2018.
Hansard. (2018a). House of commons women and equalities committee, Sexual
harassment in the workplace, fifth report of session 2017–19, report, together
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 29

with formal minutes relating to the report, HC725. https://publications.par

liament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmwomeq/725/725.pdf. Accessed 26
April 2021.
Hansard. (2018b). Sexual harassment in the workplace: Government response to the
[WEC] committee’s fifth report of session 2017–19. https://publications.parlia
ment.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmwomeq/1801/180102.htm. Accessed
4 May 2021.
Heffer, G. (2018, October 24). Ex-Commons employee Lisette Whittaker: I
was assaulted and stalked by MP. Sky News. https://news.sky.com/story/ex-
commons-employee-lisette-whittaker-i-was-assaulted-and-stalked-by-mp-115
34179. Accessed 29 October 2018.
Hughes, L. (2018, June 14). Abuse of power: the truth about sexual harassment
in Westminster. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/5e6a296c-
6e9e-11e8-92d3-6c13e5c92914. Accessed 15 May 2019.
Julios, C. (2015). Forced marriage and ‘Honour’ killings in Britain: Private lives,
community crimes and public policy perspectives. Ashgate.
Julios, C. (2019). Female genital mutilation and social media. Routledge.
Kantor, J., & Twohey, M. (2017, October 5). Harvey Weinstein
paid off sexual harassment accusers for decades. The New York
Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/harvey-weinstein-harass
ment-allegations.html. Accessed 28 August 2020.
Kelly, B. (2019, April 30). Why is there no government in Northern Ireland and
how did power-sharing collapse? Independent. https://www.independent.
co.uk/news/uk/politics/northern-ireland-talks-latest-power-sharing-deal-sto
rmont-sinn-fein-dup-a8893096.html. Accessed 27 September 2019.
Kelly, L. (1988). Surviving sexual violence [Kindle Paperwhite version]. Polity
Press. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Surviving-Sexual-Violence-Feminist-Per
spectives-ebook/dp/B00DSLEZZE/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=
UTF8&qid=1619973103&sr=8-1. Accessed 2 May 2021.
Kentish, B. (2017, November 2). Kelvin Hopkins: Labour MP suspended over
sexual harassment claims. Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/
news/uk/politics/kelvin-hopkins-labour-mp-suspended-sexual-harassment-all
egations-a8034771.html. Accessed 1 November 2018.
Kowalski, B. M., & Scheitle, C. P. (2020). Sexual identity and attitudes about
gender roles. Sexuality & Culture, 24(3), 671–691. http://web.b.ebscoh
ost.com.ezproxy.lib.bbk.ac.uk/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&sid=b29
6242e-7ca9-4b08-8714-e07a27254023%40pdc-v-sessmgr06. Accessed 24
August 2020.
Krook, M. L. (2018). Westminster too: On sexual harassment in British politics.
The Political Quarterly, 89(1), 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.
12458
30 C. JULIOS

Krook, M. L. (2020). Violence against women in politics [Kindle Paperwhite

version]. Oxford University Press. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Violence-
against-Women-Politics-Krook-ebook/dp/B08B8SK2HW/ref=tmm_kin_swa
tch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1633281293&sr=8-1. Accessed 3 October
2021.
Krook, M. L. (2021, April 25). A global movement to end violence against
women in politics and public life. e-International Relations. https://www.e-
ir.info/2021/04/25/a-global-movement-to-end-violence-against-women-in-
politics-and-public-life/. Accessed 28 September 2021.
Kuperberg, R. (2018). Intersectional violence against women in politics. Poli-
tics & Gender, 14(4), 685–690. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X180
00612
Lovenduski, J. (2014). The institutionalisation of sexism in politics. Political
Insight, 5(2), 16–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-9066.12056
MacKinnon, C. A. (1979). Sexual harassment of working women: A case of sex
discrimination. Yale University Press.
Maidment, J. (2017, November 2). Ruth Davidson claims “dam has broken”
on Westminster sleaze scandal. The Telegraph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/
news/2017/11/02/ruth-davidson-claims-dam-has-broken-westminster-sle
aze-scandal/. Accessed 26 October 2018.
Mairs, N. (2017, November 19). Lib Dem deputy Jo Swinson savages party
over failure to oust Lord Rennard. PoliticsHome. https://www.politicshome.
com/news/uk/political-parties/liberal-democrats/news/90736/lib-dem-dep
uty-jo-swinson-savages-party-over. Accessed 15 January 2022.
Marriage, M. (2018, January 23). Men only: Inside the charity fundraiser
where hostesses are put on show. The Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/
content/075d679e-0033-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b5. Accessed 30 October
2018.
Mason, R. (2014, January 15). Lib Dems will take no action against Lord
Rennard over harassment claims. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.
com/politics/2014/jan/15/lord-rennard-lib-dems-no-action-sex-pest-com
plaints. Accessed 15 November 2018.
Matthews, A., & Robinson, M. (2017, October 30). Defence Secretary Michael
Fallon ADMITS repeatedly touching radio host’s knee until she threatened
to punch him in the face if he did it again as more sex allegations against
Cabinet Ministers emerge. Mail Online. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/
article-5033455/Michael-Fallon-APOLOGISES-touching-radio-host-s-knee.
html. Accessed 1 November 2018.
McCaughey, M., & Ayers, D. (eds. ). (2003). Cyberactivism: Online activism in
theory and practice. Routledge.
McGowan, R. (2018). Brave. HarperCollinsPublishers Ltd.
 1 INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT 31

McKinley, J. Jr. (2018). Harvey Weinstein indicted on rape and criminal sexual
act charges. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/30/
nyregion/weinstein-indicted-rape.html. Accessed 22 October 2018.
Merrick, R. (2017, October 31). Conservative “dirty dossier”: List alleging
sexual impropriety naming ministers and party members spreads across social
media. Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cab
inet-minister-woman-nda-sexual-harassment-dirty-dossier-tory-party-conservat
ive-mps-theresa-may-a8029616.html. Accessed 1 November 2018.
Morley, N. (2017, October 31). ‘Westminster sex pest dossier’ includes tory
MPs in Theresa May’s inner circle. Metro. https://metro.co.uk/2017/10/
31/westminster-sex-pest-dossier-includes-tory-mps-in-theresa-mays-inner-cir
cle-7040805. Accessed 25 October 2018.
Nash, J. C. (2008). Re-thinking intersectionality. Feminist Review, (89), 1–15.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40663957. Accessed 16 May 2019.
National Assembly for Wales. (2018, May 17). Assembly approves new Dignity
and Respect Policy. http://www.assembly.wales/en/newhome/pages/new
sitem.aspx?itemid=1857. Accessed 27 September 2019.
Newell, C. (2018, October 24). The British #MeToo scandal which cannot be
revealed. The Telegraph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/10/23/
british-metoo-scandal-cannot-revealed/. Accessed 30 October 2018.
Newell, C., Dixon, H., Adams, C., Barnes, S., & Rumbsy, B. (2018, October
26). Sir Philip Green named in Parliament as businessman at centre of
Britain’s #MeToo scandal. The Telegraph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/
news/2018/10/25/sir-philip-green-named-parliament-businessman-centre-
britains/. Accessed 30 October 2018.
Newman, C. (2017, October 29). “Sexminster”: Channel 4 News’ 2014 survey
of harassment in parliament given new relevance’. Channel 4 News. https://
www.channel4.com/news/sexminster-channel-4-news-2014-survey-of-harass
ment-in-parliament-given-new-relevance. Accessed 1 November 2018.
Northern Ireland Assembly. (2021). About the assembly. http://www.niassembly.
gov.uk/about-the-assembly/. Accessed 30 June 2021.
OECD, D. C. (2014). Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI): 2014
Synthesis report. https://www.genderindex.org/wp-content/uploads/files/
docs/BrochureSIGI2015.pdf. Accessed 11 July 2020.
O’Neill, S. (2017, November 13). Women at human rights chambers complain
of sexual harassment. https://advance-lexis-com.libezproxy.open.ac.uk/
document/?pdmfid=1519360&crid=4d498979-ad77-43e1-adfc-0d3d18
69ce2c&pddocfullpath=%2Fshared%2Fdocument%2Fnews%2Furn%3Acont
entItem%3A5PY4-SJY1-JBVM-Y08F-00000-00&pdcontentcomponentid=
10939&pdteaserkey=sr0&pditab=allpods&ecomp=yzgnk&earg=sr0&prid=
edd928d6-e39f-4c14-9c17-1a23ca05c2b1. Accessed 20 June 2021.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Runoja
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Runoja

Author: Lars Stenbäck

Translator: Yrjö Weijola

Release date: September 21, 2023 [eBook #71697]

Language: Finnish

Original publication: Helsinki: Otava, 1900

Credits: Juhani Kärkkäinen and Tapio Riikonen

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK RUNOJA ***

RUNOJA

Kirj.

Lars Stenbäck

Suomentanut

Yrjö Weijola

Helsingissä, Kustannusosakeyhtiö Otava, 1900.

SISÄLLYS.
I.

Kirje ystävälleni.
Anna.
Lemmikki.
Aamutervehdys.
G. F. J. Adlercreutz.
Rakkaus.
Aamunkoitto.
Meri.
Runebergille.
Matkamuistelmia:
1. Hyvästi.
2. Tukholma.
3. Tervehdys Upsalalle.
4. Skon luostari.
Katkelmia.
Eräs yö.
Tyttö.
Sanat Maisterinvihkiäisissä 1836.
Ylioppilas-laulu.
H. G. Porthanin muistojuhlassa.
Mun oma Suomenmaani.
Tähti.
Juhana Vilhelm Snellmanille.

II.

Öisiä säveleitä:
1. Juomingit.
2. Huokaus.
3. Murheelle.
4. Hyvää yötä.
5. Katumus.
Aamu.
Sointuja.
Tytön rukous.
Heränneen huokaus.
Pois pelkosi!
Johannes.
Keväthuokaus.
Sentään.
Eräs päivä.
Radegundis.
Beeda.
Kevätaamu.
Lyydian kehtolaulu.
Sureva ystävä.
Kuoleman kuvia.
Lutherin Postillaan.
Oi tokkohan?
Hyvästi.
Uudenvuoden-laulu.
Luontokappalten huokaus.
Lähetyslaulu.
Iltarukous.
Epiloogi.

LIITE.

Rukouksia ensi kertaa käydessäni Herran ehtoollisella.

Suomi hädässä.
Kysymyksiä.
Psalmi.
Vastaus vanhalle Puutarhurille.
Jälkilause.

Mä olin häkkiin koonnut lintusia;

Niit' yksikseni aioin holhoella
 Ja tarkoin piskuisia puolustella
Niin vastaan viimaa kuin myös huuhkaimia.
Mut luonnon raitis elo mieless' aina
Mun luotani ne pyysi poijes lentää.
Ne tahtoi lehdon siimeksehen entää,
Miss' laulut vapaat kaikui riemukkaina.
Kun kerran taas loi päivä säteheitä.
Ja kirkkahana hohti joka loukko,
Ne kysyi: "Vieläkö sä pidät meitä?"
Mä silloin närkästyin ja virkoin, houkko:
"En jaksa enkä viitsi nähdä teitä;
Siis lähde joutuin lentoon, kurja joukko!"

I.

Kirje ystävälleni.

Linnut laulelevat, ja mielellä lempijän nuoren

Nousevi aurinko taas öiseltä vuoteheltaan;
Katsovi loistavin silmin ja tervehtii hymyellen
Vuoria, laaksoja maan, riemua, minuakin.
Oi ken saattaiskaan valon loistossa synkkänä vaiti
Miettiä murheissaan päivän vaivoja vaan?
Kaikki, mi ilmassa on sekä kaikki mi liikkuvi maassa
Herännyt nauttimahan on elon hehkumataan.
Kirjat nurkkahan nyt, väkiviisahat, mahtavat, paksut;
Unta on viisaus tuo, usvana haihtuu se pois.
Mutta mun katsettain elo, aamu ja aurinko kohtaa,
Aamu ja aurinko vaan, kunne ma silmäni luon.
Suo mun riemuita siis! Kuin joutsen pinnalla lahden
Niin minun sieluni myös riemussa, onnessa ui;
Rintani käy kepeäks, sydän elämän onnea uhkuin
Lämmin ja ylpeä on, tulta ja tarmoa täys.
Sykkiös polttava, kohta jo riutuva rinta, kun vielä
Riemu ja ystävät kaikk', onni ja laulu on sun!

Terve! kun aamuisin elo unten usvasta herää,

Herää uutena taas riemuni rinnassa mun.
Tuota mun enkeliäin oi säästäkää, aattehet maiset,
Jotka niin hiljalleen jäähän peitätte sen
Kaiken, mi noin sulosilmässään kuvan taivahan kantaa,
Kaiken mi katsehen luo maahan ja taivohonkin.
Tietää en tahdo, mit' on se, sill' et jumalallista, pyhää
Kaikkea ymmärtää järkeni kurja sä voi.
Mut kuni kukkasenkin salakätkössä piilevi tuoksu,
Piilköhön mullakin niin taivahan tunnelma tuo!
Lapsi jos ain' olisin, niin rinnassa riemukin aina,
Vieras taivahien, kernaasti viihtyä vois.

Terve! kun aamuisin elo unten usvasta herää,

Herää rinnassa mun ystävän kaihoni myös.
Kaunis oot sinä maa, niin kaunis on kukkiva otsas,
Lempivä aavistus hehkuvi rinnassa mun;
Mut tuo kuollutt' on kaikki, on pois elähyttävä paiste,
Ellei vierellä mun lemmitty ystävä oo;
Lemmitty ystävä, ken mun riemuni jakaa ja silmin
Hellin ja uskollisin katsovi silmihin mun.
Oi, ken ei halajais elon kaltaat kalseat heittää,
Syöksyä onnessaan sylihin ystävän niin?
Oi, ken saattaiskaan elon pitkät puhtehet kestää
Yksin piirissä maan, yksin usvissa yön?
Kun sinä Luojani loit noin rintani lempeä täyteen,
Myös ikirunsahan soit riemun sa kaihoavan,
Niin sinun maailmaas, elämää sen lempiä tahdon,
Joukossa ihmisien toimia, minkä ma voin;
Uskollisna ma siis ilomielin ja luottaen riennän
Sieluni lemmityn nyt syliini sulkemahan,
Puristan kättä ja lämmitän rintaa ja värjyvin äänin
Kuiskaan korvahan sen: ystävä, kaikkeni saat!
— Vaikk' kiven ois kova hän tai kylmä kuin talvinen hanki,
Rintansa rinnasta mun pehmenis, lämpeniskin;
Niin kuin Pygmalion elonvoimalla lempensä liekin
Marmoripatsaaseen tuntehen, elämän loi.
Ah, miks haastelen noin sulo-onnesta, rakkaudesta
Niin kuni sopertelee lapsonen uupumaton?
Jos sinut vaan minä nään, jos suoriin silmihis katson,
Kaikkipa kalveten taas sortuvi tuhkaksi maan.
Taistella tahdomme ain' sen eestä, mi totta ja hyvää,
Taistella, ystävä oi, toimia, kuollakin myös!

Terve! kun aamuisin elo unten usvasta herää,

Herää laulukin myös hetkeksi helkkymähän.
Mut vähä-arvoist' on toki laulujen haihtuva leikki,
Pientä ja turhaa on lapsen se riemua vaan;
Aattehen miehentyöt, vakavuus syvän, miettivän mielen
Kuuluu miehelle, min luontona on vakavuus.
Joskus mietin mä näin; mut pois, pois haltijat mustat,
Jotka mun Eedenihin' tungette turmioks sen!
Enkö mä onnekas oo? Elon' on kevätpäivyen kirkas,
Kun runon aurinko sen kultahan, loistohon luo!
Enkö mä riemuiten satumailla mun syömmeni viihdy,
Sinnehän kaihoni käy, sinnehän tieni on sees;
Lapsena riemuiten, kuninkaana, mi vallassa istuin
Katsovi ylpeillen maita ja maisemiaan?
Oi, joka ihmissielussa on runolempi, hän vaikka
Ei sitä tiedäkkään, ei sitä aattelekaan.
Kaikki, mi sieluhun luo kevätpäivän paistetta, kaikki,
Mist' elo maireheks käy tai povi paisuelee,
Kaikki se on runoutta, sit' ilman ois elo harmaa,
Mut sitä kaikkiall' on, niin kuni päivyttä on.

Laulun laulanut oon minä auerhetkenä aamun,

Kunnes aurinko on noussut loistava taas.
Riemu ja Laulu ja Rakkaus on sisaruksia aamun,
Loistossa viihtyy ne sen, sammua voi kera sen.
Kunnes harhaillen ne rinnasta haihtuvat, suokoot
Rauhaa, viileyttään, ystävä, sullekin myös.
Hetken tuutia sai mua laulun sointuvat laineet,
Tuutios niillä sä myös huoleti tuokio niin;
Solminut seppelen oon, min kohta jo kukkaset kuihtuu,
Ennenkuin kuihtuvat ne, ystävä, sulle sen suon.
Anna.

Miksi kiedoit kätes kaulahain?

Miksi suudelman niin hellän sain?
Miksi ryöstit rauhan
Sekä rakkauden rinnastain?

Korkeammalle mä tavoitin
Kuin sun suudelmiin ja sylihin;
Uljaamp' oli toimi,
Jonka nuorin voimin aavistin.

Lemmen ansio niin heikko on,

Lemmen haave kurja, arvoton.
Tuhlata en tahdo
Elämääni uneen onttohon.

Katso, miestä kutsuu maineen tie,

Aina avoin hälle, missä lie;
Vihdoin laaker'kruunun
Vapaana hän voittonansa vie.

Uljas into rinnan rohkaistun!

Ollos sä vaan perintönä mun,
Niin mä hiljaan heitän
Rakkauden sulo haaveilun. —

Ei, oi tullos jälleen luokseni

Hurjan rintain armas toveri!
Korkeint' aavistustain
Olet sinä aina korkeempi.
 Silmäs ruskeathan säihkyää
Kaikelle, mik' eloss' ylevää!
Otsas puhtaudessaan
Lailla sinitaivaan välkähtää!

Sin' oot sielu nuoren elämäin;

Vahvista siis, nosta henkeäin!
Tähti olet mulle;
Yö ja usvat aja mielestäin!

Lapsuuslempi, nuoruusmorsian,
Suo mun kuulla huultes puhuvan;
Oi! Se mulle soi kuin
Unhoitettu käsky Jumalan.

Lemmikki.

[Kukka, jonka nimi ruotsiksi on "Förgät mig ej" s.o.

"Ällös unhoita minua".]

Vaikk' olen pieni kukka vain,

Niin toimen autuaan mä sain:
On hoidossani lempi.
Kun moni hylkää armahan,
Mä silloin hälle muistutan,
Kuin ennen muinoin lempi hän,
Ja armas häntä hempi.
 On toivon väri mulla; ja
Kun armas eroo armaasta
Suon lohdun murheesensa.
Heill' on vain yksi rukous,
Heill' on vain yksi toivomus;
Mun tulkitsemaan tunteitaan
Suo armas armaallensa.

Kun joskus armas kysyy näin:

"Oi mitä miettii ystäväin,
Viel' elääkö hän mulle?"
Niin rinnall' armaan lempivän
Mä kuiskaan toivon lämpimän:
Mua katso, uskollisin, vain,
Mä lausunhan sen sulle.

Mut kun hän päivät kauttaaltaan

Odottanut on pelvoissaan
Ja turhaan armastansa;
Kun silmän kastaa kyynele,
Mi vuotaa toivon haudalle,
Niin jälleen toivon sytytän
Mä hänen rintahansa.

Aamutervehdys.

Oi terve taivas, terve maa, mi nyt

Säteilet kainon morsiamen lailla!
Ma nään, kuin sykkii poves lämminnyt;
Häälaulus kuulen hattaroiden mailla.
Taas sydän elpyy ja tuo pitkä kaipuu
Kuin talven hanget kevään tullen haipuu.
Kas, muistot armaat aikain mennehitten
Nään aamu-autereessa väikkyvän.- —
Oi tullos, tullos ystävän'!

Kun päivyt nousi neitsytvuoteeltaan,

Tuo kultakutri, niin kuin nyt, ja paloi
Eloa, nuoruutta, ja tuoksujaan
Tuhannet kukat kunniaks sen valoi;
Kun elon tenho tuli meille ilmin
Ja meitä kahta katsoi kirkkain silmin;
Niin silloin käsityksin seistiin kerran
Helossa aamun poskin hehkuisin
Ja silmin tulta, säihkyvin.

Kuin mainetöistä silloin haaveiltiin!

Kuin hehkui sielu, sykki sydän siellä!
Vakaasti vannoimme me kaksi niin
Kaikk' ilot, surut jakaa elon tiellä.
Oi, suloist' on, kun silmät rakkaat loistaa
Ja omat toiveet kaksinkerroin toistaa,
Ja elon suuri temppeli on auki;
Oi rohkeus, oi riemu! tarmo, työ,
Mist' ytimet ja suonet lyö!

Sä kevään tuuli lämmin, vapaa ain',

Hajoita mielest' usvapilvet multa!
Jo miehuus, lämpö herää rinnassain
Ja sinne koittaa kirkas päivän kulta.
Voit, kevät, mulle entisriemut antaa;
Kuin ennen vuorelta taas aamunrantaa
Mä tervehdin ja katson päivää uutta.
Niin täynnä elonintoa se on
Ja kultasäteit' auringon!

G. F. J. Adlercreutz.

Päivyt loistaen
Katsoo hymyillen
Yli meren, maan.
Murtunut vaan rinta
On, kun rakkahinta
Itken ystävätä haudallaan.

Lapsuus-laaksomme
Kun oi' linnamme,
Rauhan rakas maa;
Turvana sa mulle
Turvana ma sulle
Elon tahdoimme me alottaa.

Miehuus, toivo kun

Veress' uhkui sun,
Mieles suuriin nous;
Oi, juur' silloin valoon
Taivaan tähtitaloon
Herran luo sun nuori henkes nous.
 Kuollut? ystäväin
Ainoo, ja mä jäin,
Ainoo, armahin!
Kuollut — kylmä multa
Nytkö henkes tulta
Sammuttaa, mi äsken hehkui niin?

Siteet rakkahat
Kaikki katkeevat;
Herra elää vaan.
Kun kaikk' ystävämme
Katoo viereltämme,
Oi, ken yksin jäädä tahtoiskaan?

Rakkaus.

Niin kuin yössä rämisten

Katkes kieli kantelen
Äkkiä, ja ääni särkyi
Valittain ja vaikeni;
Niinpä käsi salainen
Katkoi lemmen sitehen,
Joka minun sisimpäni
Sinuun, armas, kahlehti.

Katson vaiti kaiholla

Sijaa tyhjää, kallista,
Missä lempen' loistoss' eli
Kerran kirkas kuva sun.
Kun ma kautta kyynelveen
Katson haudan tyhjyyteen,
Tuskan äärettömän huokaus
Tunkee kautta rinnan mun.

Yhä vielä mulle näyt,

Yhä vieressäni käyt
Niin kuin ennen, mutta haamu
Oot vain aikain entisten.
Kuollut! äänin kaihokkain
Tunne huutaa rinnassain;
Mutta silmissäni elät,
Niinkuin ennen, eellehen.

Rakastaa vai vihata

Tuota kuvaa tuttua?
Itkeekö vai nauttii sydän
Unest' havahduttuaan?
Saitko siis sa multa vain
Elos tuon, mun tuntemain?
Vihassako siitä kuolit
Elääkses nyt muille vain?

Kaikist’ antimista maan

Rakkaus on parhain vaan,
Niinhän sille riemahdellen
Ihmislasten laulu soi.
Että lempi kurjan maan,
Murhaa, valhetta on vaan,
Jonka heelmä ain' on tuska —
Haa! kuink' ymmärtää sen voi?
Aamunkoitto.

Niinkuin kuningatar vertaa vailla

Kuuhut loisti taivaan tähtimailla
Neitseellisnä hohtain, hymyillen.
Kummut hopeaisen hohdon loivat;
Laakson kukat hiljaa unelmoivat,
Autuaina lapsen lailla, taivaan
Riemuista ja leikeist' enkelten.

Haaveidensa kuutamoiseen kehtoon

Sielu lensi unelmainsa lehtoon,
Loistoon ihmehien tuhanten.
Ja kun nukkui maa, kun tähdet lensi,
Kuvat kauniit kaukaa rintaan ensi
Niinkuin siskot, satuja ne kertoi
Kultamaastaan päältä pilvien.

Mutta luona puron hopeaisen,

Alla koivukummun varjoovaisen
Mökki yksin laakson rauhass' on.
Näytti niin, kuin luonto sen ois luonut,
Kaunistukseks hiljaisuuteen suonut
Maiseman, ja kuuhut kirkkain sätein
Leikki lehväsillä koivikon.

Siellä hiipi aamun auvetessa,

Lännen tuulen vielä nukkuessa
Aksel alle armaan ikkunan.
Seisahtui ja viipyi seinämällä;
Mutta vaiti viel' on kaikki hällä.
Hiljaa löi hän ruutuun kerran, kaksi,
Lausui tervehdykseks armahan:

"Aune, Aune, nouse vuoteeltasi;

Tullos, tullos luo sun armahasi,
Morsioni, toivo sydämein!
Nähdä suo, kuin hellä silmäs päilyy,
Nähdä suo, kuin tummat kutris häilyy
Hulmuellen yli otsas puhtaan.
Tullos nuori, kaunis ruususein!

Äsken näin ma kyyhkyn viattoman

Luoksein liitävän niin sulosoman,
Ja se laskeutui mun jalkoihin.
Sen kun näin, kun sitä katsoin minä,
Hurskas lintu olit armas sinä.
Oi, mut kaikki, kaikki, vaan oi' unta,
Pois se lensi, ah, sen kadotin.

Miksi sykit niin sä hurja rinta?

Riemua vai tuskaa katkerinta
On, mi sydän raukkaa ahdistaa?
Kaunis maa, oot sama ajan mennen;
Konsaan huomannut en sentään ennen
Aunen majan luona lämpimätä
Liekkiä, jot' uhkuu taivas, maa.

Aune, Aune, nouse vuoteeltasi,

Tullos, tullos luo sun armahasi,
Morsioni, toivo sydämen'!
Peippoin virttä lehdot, laaksot kaikuu,
Leivo lentää, ilman ääret raikuu,