Let's start with a few headlines:
The Met Opera Fired James Levine, Citing Sexual Misconduct (September 2020)
Long Wharf Theater Leader Is Accused of Sexual Misconduct (January 2018)
I wish I could say this was an exhaustive list, but unfortunately it's just a perfunctory Google search of a random selection across performing arts disciplines. Notably, all of the above headlines come on the heels of the emerging strength of the MeToo movement. For a more in-depth exploration of the whos and whys of sexual harassment and "misconduct" in the arts, you might start with Diep Tran's excellent observations in American Theatre. I hope the momentum continues. As horrific as these incidents are, and as common as they seem to be in the arts, what is left on the table is the high number of garden variety tyrants still employed by arts organizations.
There is a distinction between one's direct boss and the head of an arts organization, in terms of influence, positive or negative, on the culture of the institution. Bad bosses abound on all organizational levels, and the reasons generally follow some variation of the Peter Principle. But the artistic director, chief executive, general director, or whomever is at the top will set the tone that permeates the fabric of the entire organization.
Such bad behavior is allowed (or at least tolerated) for a variety of reasons. Quite often these are smaller non-profit organizations with weak boards. Smaller arts organizations have a more difficult time recruiting competent arts leaders. The arts leader may have founded the organization, and therefore feels entitled to run it as their own autocracy. Some leaders assume that their creative abilities go hand in hand with tyrannical behavior, as if creative excellence can be fueled by screaming. Whatever the rationale is, it's all bad.
Many years ago as part of my graduate program, my assignment was to stage manage a production of Into the Woods. The director came from the highly successful ITV Granada Artists-In-Residence program at UC Davis. On the first day of production, the director stood up and announced to the entire cast, for no apparent reason, "I HATE STAGE MANAGERS." Suffice to say it was all downhill from there. Were it not for the fact that I was already a working professional, employed by the University as the campus stage manager for the fine arts presenting program, I might have crumbled under his withering abuse. And let's face it, I was a man. I was luckier than my two female ASM's, who left more than one of the rehearsals crying.
It is the imbalance of power that allows this behavior to continue. The implied threat is that unless we put up with this nonsense, it will affect our careers, our community, our reputations, or in this case, our grade. At one particularly contentious production meeting this director went on an extended rant about something or other until I pointedly told him that he was wrong and should stop. There was a good deal of shouting and sputtering that followed, but in the end he capitulated. He also knew that the power imbalance had shifted. I got a B in the course.
I don't know how the myth of the tyrant with the creative mind came about or how it continues to perpetuate, but there isn't a place for it in your career or life. For women and men, and for all manner of sexual identity in between, the nefarious instances of sexual harassment are just the extreme end of the spectrum. None of it should be acceptable. It's not part of the creative mystique. It should never be lionized or justified. It should be starved of all oxygen and die. At no time in your career should you have to "pay your dues" by working for an ass. If you work alongside someone with this temperament, run away. If you're employed in an organization that tolerates this in their executive leadership, get out. And if you find yourself in any kind of situation where you are the subject of sexual harassment, I'll coach you out of there and into a new opportunity pro bono. No joke.