Go to content, skip over navigation


More Pages

Go to content, skip over visible header bar
Home News Features Arts & Entertainment Sports OpinionAbout Contact Advertise

Note about Unsupported Devices:

You seem to be browsing on a screen size, browser, or device that this website cannot support. Some things might look and act a little weird.

Visiting lecturer contends that the world would be a better place if the #MeToo movement had never happened

November 2, 2018

Last night, journalist Helen Andrews gave a talk at Bowdoin titled “The New McCarthyism” in which she compared today’s culture of “political correctness” with Joseph McCarthy’s persecution of accused communist sympathizers in the 1950s. Andrews argued that McCarthyism was aimed at “an existential threat” and all accusations were supported by evidence, but said the #MeToo movement has created a similar atmosphere without clearing the same evidentiary hurdle. Instead of armed agents of the state, she said, the McCarthyites of today wield Facebook posts.

Much of the lecture dealt with history. Andrews claimed that McCarthyites would produce evidence to support the idea that the alleged communists were a threat to America—although McCarthy himself was at one point censured by his Senate colleagues for ethics violations. Andrews noted nonetheless that this image sharply contrasts with today’s world in which people can have their lives ruined by something as simple as a frivolous comment on a Facebook post.

One of the more tense moments took place when Ezra Rice ’19 asked, “all in all, do you think the world is better off due to the #MeToo movement?” Andrews responded with a simple “no.”

When Rice elaborated, asking if one could really tell women who now feel safer that #MeToo had a net negative effect, Andrews dismissed the idea that the world is better for women in the movement’s wake. She claimed that, while it may currently be safer for women than in what she calls the “nadir of sexual activity,” from the 1960s to 1990s, there were far fewer sexual assaults in the more traditionalist era of the 1940s and 1950s.

She blamed a rise in sexual assaults on college campuses on the integration of men and women in the second half of the twentieth century, arguing that sexual assaults make sense when you put “people at their most sexually active and irresponsible age living, without adult supervision, in gender-integrated housing.”

In an interview after the lecture, the Orient asked for clarification and evidence for Andrew’s assertion that there were more sexual assaults in the 2000s and 2010s than in the 1940s and 1950s. She admitted that she did not have evidence, but claimed that arguing points that could not be proven but that also could not be disproven is an effective tactic of persuasion.

Throughout the talk, Andrews was quick to admit that she was looking to challenge and even offend. When the Orient asked how she would feel if there was a sexual assault survivor in the audience when she critiqued the #MeToo movement, and if she feared that she was in danger of delegitimizing a student’s trauma, Andrews responded that survivors of sexual assault needed to learn resilience.

“I think that it is important for trauma victims to be realistic about where they are in their healing process,” she said. “If you’re not ready to talk about these sorts of issues, then I think it’s completely OK, and not something you should be judged for, if you want to absent yourself from those conversations.”

Andrews is a writer with bylines in the Catholic Herald, the Weekly Standard and the National Review, and was the 2017-18 Robert Novak Journalism Fellow. She has also worked as a think tank researcher. Andrews described her experience at Bowdoin as a good one.

“I was afraid I was going to get a Middlebury mob, but no, the reception here has been not only courteous, but also intellectually stimulating, you guys are really on the ball, extremely impressive,” she said.


Before submitting a comment, please review our comment policy. Some key points from the policy:

  • No hate speech, profanity, disrespectful or threatening comments.
  • No personal attacks on reporters.
  • Comments must be under 200 words.
  • You are strongly encouraged to use a real name or identifier ("Class of '92").
  • Any comments made with an email address that does not belong to you will get removed.


  1. Piper ’11 says:

    Who sponsored the lecture/where was it held?

  2. Old Timer says:

    Helen Andrews admitted that she lied at least once during her talk, making up bogus statistics about the incidence of sexual assault for which she had no evidence. When her dishonesty was exposed, instead of showing shame or remorse, she boasted that misleading people is “an effective tactic of persuasion.”
    Kudos to The Orient for calling her out. Conservatives used to stand for honesty and honor, so will the Eisenhower Forum, as organizers, please condemn Andrews’ morally and intellectually bankrupt behavior?

  3. Alumni '11 says:

    Genuinely surprised that the group that sponsored the event isn’t listed. I had to go on the Helen Andrews’s twitter account to find out that the Bowdoin Eisenhower Forum hosted the speaker.

    The statements quoted and/or referenced in this article seem to go directly against the core beliefs of Bowdoin. I sincerely hope that the decision to bring Helen Andrews to campus is reviewed by the College.

Leave a Reply

Any comments that do not follow the policy will not be published.

0/200 words