Schadenfreude!

This week’s topic of discussion relates to Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton’s affair and the internet shaming that followed. First of all, I am quite confused as to how the events surrounding this affair are related to the #MeToo movement— a movement against the sexual harassment and assault of women. While it is wrong for any person to engage in any affairs, the relationship between Clinton and Lewinsky seemed to be consensual. In Lewinsky’s Ted Talk, she talked about falling in love with Clinton and facing the devastating consequences on social media afterwards. Let’s be clear: this is a cyberbullying issue, not a sexual abuse issue. Lewinsky personally admitted that their relationship was consensual and any abuse came during the aftermath of the scandal. Yet, written in a BBC article, she also contradicts herself by saying she believes the affair was "a gross abuse of power" adding, "he was my boss. He was the most powerful man on the planet". Her logic seems to be that the power difference automatically implies Clinton’s “gross abuse of power”. In that case, do power differences between all couples in relationships imply an abuse of power? How big does the power gap need to be for it to be considered abusive? How is power measured? Would it still have been considered an abuse of power if Clinton was the woman and Lewinsky was the man? Sure, a US president is powerful in many ways: being able to sign/veto legislations, command armed forces, convene congress, etc… But I do not believe Clinton exercised any of those powers in his relationship with Lewinsky. 

So let’s focus on the real issue— cyberbullying. First of all, I think it is worthwhile to examine why cyberbullying over social media is so prevalent. In a study done in 2013, researchers found that humans experience Schadenfreude— pleasure at another person’s distress— by the age of four. Biologically, humans often feel good when others feel bad. There is a saying in Japan: “the misfortunes of others taste like honey”. However, in reality, most people wouldn’t go around and torture others to make themselves feel better. That is because of the direct moral and ethical repercussions. But over the internet, people can remain anonymous and are able to remove that direct sense of moral repercussions. Their costs are minimal but they still have a legitimate payoff: that warm sense of smugness that comes at the price of others’ sufferings— Schadenfreude. People commonly perceive women are weaker than men, so it would be expected that Lewinsky (being only an intern in her 20s) was the bigger target for social media humiliation than Clinton. To maximize their personal feelings of smugness, people chose the weaker perceived target to cyberbully. I believe to help solve this issue, Lewinsky is doing a great job by projecting her voice through Ted Talks and other social media platforms. By changing people’s perception of women as weak figures, Lewinsky is minimizing their benefits from Schadenfreude.