Opportunity vs. Objectification
By Emma Seel
TW: This article contains mentions of sexual violence and abuse.
The Epstein files expose despicable acts perpetrated by some of the world’s wealthiest. Thousands of documents reveal how Jeffrey Epstein’s mentality—one that sexualizes and commodifies women—pervades immensely powerful institutions, from the halls of the Ivy League all the way to the Oval Office.
For many women, the files present an all-too-familiar truth: Professional advancement is often accompanied by objectification, a dynamic that is not just difficult to navigate but potentially dangerous. Emails between Epstein and his contacts exhibit how women’s career aspirations were distorted through a sexualizing lens, placing them in uncomfortable situations and entirely negating their accomplishments.
In one exchange, former Harvard professor Larry Summers wrote about a woman he was speaking with, referring to himself as her “economics mentor.” After she declined a drink, Summers suggested to Epstein that the relationship might not be worthwhile, and that the “right thing is to cut off contact. Suspect she will miss it. Problem is I will too.”
It is reasonable to assume this woman was maintaining the professional nature of their relationship by setting a boundary — a drink may have felt too intimate. But once she drew this line, Summers withdrew his mentorship.
That is not a trivial loss.
Mentors are among the strongest factors in professional advancement, as many SIPA students know, with 75 percent of executives saying mentors have been critical to their career development. If a woman’s mentor retreats when she declines a drink, so does access to networks and opportunities that could accelerate her career.
The Epstein files further reveal how this objectifying lens can impact professional prospects from the very start of the process. In initial recommendations, business executives and professors sent women’s resumes to Epstein alongside descriptions of their physical appearance.
When UCLA neurologist Mark Tramo forwarded emails from two students interested in research positions, Epstein responded with a short question that disregarded their inquiries or academic credentials: “are either of these cute?”
Tramo replied, “we’ll see! (you’re terrible!)”
While Epstein’s evaluation of women had far more sinister implications, this exchange exhibits a broader pattern in professional recruitment. These students were writing about research positions and academic collaborations, yet the initial evaluation focused entirely on physical appearance.
In another case, a Swedish business executive, Barbro Ehnbom, would send photos with CVs when recommending her mentees to Epstein, often referring to them as “Barbro’s Best & Brightest” or “BBB Girls.” One email relays Ehnbom’s suggestion that Epstein meet one of these women, describing her as “charming, sweet and pretty.” In another exchange, Ehnbom promises to forward a woman’s CV and photo to Epstein, saying she is “a super smart attractive BBB girl.”
Presenting students and mentees in this manner normalizes assessing women on factors unrelated to their professional competence. In such a culture, every woman’s career is endangered by expectations that may be set outside of the professional sphere. Whether seeking a mentor, inquiring about a promotion, or negotiating a business deal, women face a balancing act where one wrong step—accepting an invitation or declining one, setting a boundary too clearly or not clearly enough—can determine whether her career advances or declines.
The Epstein files force us to acknowledge this reality. We uphold norms that consistently prioritize the feelings of men over the ambitions of women. In doing so, women’s safety is sidelined in favor of avoiding uncomfortable conversations with powerful people. The status quo persists while wealth and prestige are abused without consequence. It becomes increasingly difficult to envision change when those writing the rules are so frequently the ones breaking them.
But the first step in solving any problem is recognizing its existence, and the depravity revealed in the files brings to light a misogynistic mindset that goes largely unchecked.
While millions have fought to hold perpetrators accountable—reporting harassment, supporting survivors, joining movements like #MeToo—and made impressive advances, others still argue this is not a serious problem.
To those who fall in that group, it only takes a few clicks to access the Epstein Library, and one keyword to produce countless pages on a myriad of appalling acts. Whether harassing students, raping women, or trafficking children, the files provide incontrovertible evidence of the harassment, objectification, and exploitation faced by women.
It remains to be seen if the Epstein files will play a significant role in dismantling these structural inequalities. In all likelihood, the documents represent one step on a very long path toward that goal, but they leave no excuse for supporting the system that enables them.