Before he was accused of sexual assault and sexual harassment, Harvey Weinstein was a prolific philanthropist. He gave more than $1 million to Democrats, to different PACs, and individual candidates, according OpenSecrets data. Sickeningly, he had also allegedly pledged money to women’s organizations such as Planned Parenthood. The organizations which received money from the now tainted Weinstein are scrambling to figure out what to do with it.

Political entities – PACs, candidates and the Democratic Party – are in a unique position. They are civil servants, and who unknowingly used money from an accused sexual offender to further a political cause. 

Prominent Democrats made promises to return their donations to organizations which work to prevent sexual violence. The Democratic National Committee has promised to donate one-tenth of the donation from Weinstein to groups supporting Democratic female candidates. 

The decision to donate the money to organizations which promote women’s rights or support women candidates is a good first step, but it cannot stop there. 

Weinstein is accused of sexually assaulting and harassing 13 women over several decades. He wielded a position of power to assault women, and then publically took part in movements that call for the empowerment of women – such as the Women’s March on the day after the inauguration. 

This is not the first time that an affluent and influential man used his status to abuse women, then concealed his actions to some degree with charitable and political donations. 

Bill Cosby gave prolifically to colleges, museums and political organizations, and he was widely regarded as a premier philanthropist before being charged with aggravated sexual assault in 2015.

Bill O’Reilley settled five sexual harassment cases with accusers. His philanthropic and charitable actions include starting a foundation which donated to veterans’ organizations, arts programs and Catholic institutions. Over a span of 10 years, his foundation donated more than $7 million according a New York Times article which sourced its numbers from tax filings by the foundation. 

The money that these men donate is, without a doubt, tainted. Public servants and political organizations have taken steps showing they will reject these donations. 

However, for all the organizations which do good work to support women’s rights, veterans, the arts, and education, the question of what to do with the money is more complicated. 

These organizations need funding to function. While some the money they received came from a sexual offender, the work that some of them do could be what is necessary to change the culture around sexual assault or other causes. 

I think that organizations like these should be able to keep the money. They should disclose where it came from how much of their funding it makes up and what they use the money for. Organizations working to combat sexual violence in particular can use this as an opportunity to show why organizations such as themselves are so necessary. 

Denouncing the actions of sexual offenders is important, but it’s impact is fleeting. Changing the culture around sexual assault and harassment takes more than symbolic returning of donations or repudiating sexual offenders, it takes a long-term view of the issues at hand.