Glantz has managed to upset most people within the harm reduction community with his own brand of alternative facts. He was also involved in some unpleasant behaviour on social media, being exceptionally rude to vape community members on Twitter, along with Martin McKee and Simon Chapman. Many accuse him of not valuing the lives of smokers with his ‘quit or die’ philosophy, but now the gaze turns to his treatment of women.
Eunice Neeley is a former UC San Francisco doctoral researcher and had Stanton Glantz as her mentor. In her lawsuit, filed last Wednesday, she accuses the tenured University of California San Francisco (UCSF) professor of “consistent inappropriate behaviour”.
According to ACAS, “sexual harassment is unwanted conduct of a sexual nature. It has the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a worker, or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them. Something can still be considered sexual harassment even if the alleged harasser didn't mean for it to be. It also doesn't have to be intentionally directed at a specific person. Experiencing sexual harassment is one of the most difficult situations a worker can face.”
Neeley alleges that the harassment took place over a two-year period and, when she reported the matter to UCSF, Glantz responded by removing her name from a research paper. The university is included in the lawsuit because, she says, they failed to take any action when her complaint was made.
The behaviours she claims took place include: Glantz staring at her body, Glantz commenting to her about sex, and Glantz talking to her while at work and making sexual remarks about other women. Also, as a black woman, Neeley says that Glantz made racist comments.
The action states: “Professor GLANTZ abused his authority and prestige at UCSF and sexually harassed NEELEY, and other female subordinates, and subjected them to misogynistic and racially insensitive behaviour. While NEELEY was employed at UCSF, GLANTZ repeatedly stared at her body and chest, leered at her, forced her to hug him on several occasions, and made sexually charged remarks. NEELEY attempted to ignore GLANTZ’s harassing conduct and avoid him, but he persisted nonetheless. NEELEY finally reported the harassment to UCSF, but no immediate action was taken to protect her. Instead, UCSF and GLANTZ retaliated against NEELEY by removing authorship credit for a paper she researched and wrote, impacting her career and reputation to others.”
It goes on to state: “she noticed he spent several seconds leering at her chest, and smiled while he leered at her chest. GLANTZ leered at NEELEY’s chest, and other women’s chests, consistently during her employment. At times, he made ‘elevator eyes,’ leering at NEELEY while looking her body up and down.”
Her lawyer says: “We believe there are multiple witnesses and victims to the sexual harassment by Glantz.”
Glantz, at this stage, denies any wrongdoing.