IMO there are undoubtedly more "relationships" involving Stanford employees at various positions of "power" today than there were in the early 70s. There are many factors in play that produce this result. First, back in the late 60s early 70s Stanford was very heavily male. Same sex relationships were very heavily "frowned upon" to say the least. The relatively small number of women reduced the opportunity to form these types of relationships. That said, quite a few TAs (22 or older grad students) did have relationships with undergraduates. Most of these were not about academic advantage and were "genuine" affection-based relationships. That said, there clearly was a significant power and experience gap present that did lead to at least many broken hearts on both sides of the ledger. These relationships were public and unremarkable. The administration clearly knew it was going on and didn't say a word.
The situation at the graduate school level was a bit different. At that level there were definitely women that at least attempted to use their gender and availability to get academic "special treatment". Most of the time it didn't work because it was transparently "fake". However, there were certain faculty that were publicly known to engage in this kind of activity. One department chair continually had a female graduate student as "consort". Everybody knew about it. His admins kept an office pool on who would be the next "queen" when the current one finished her thesis and moved on. I was providing computer assistance to his group and therefore was enough of an "outsider" that nobody worried about what I knew. I was surprised none of the other grad students complained. From what I could tell they mildly resented the situation but figured it wasn't worth the downside to rock the boat. Even if the "Administration" did something to stop it, the person who "talked" would always be "questionable" going forward. Better to just finish your degree and keep your mouth shut. All in all, he was a better PI than many others who didn't have a "favorite". At the higher levels of administration it obviously was a "don't ask, don't tell" situation. They had to know, but if it wasn't "official" they could let it go.
A second factor that limited this kind of activity back in the 60s and 70s was the fact that sexual activity outside of marriage was still frowned upon by a significant percentage of the population. While Stanford students and faculty in the main didn't share that belief, the parents and donors did. Therefore it was critical to either not engage in such activity or have enough clout you could hide it in plain sight. TAs were so far down the chain nobody would even notice and the administration could profess shock when and if somebody complained (which was very seldom). TAs were also easily replaceable. Junior faculty and above would be a more serious problem. Handling it as quietly as possible was undoubtedly the approach of choice.
By the 1980s there were lots more female students. There were also more female faculty members. One might think more female faculty members would reduce the problem. In fact, the opposite was true. Power is a heady drug regardless of gender. The female faculty also benefited from the decided reluctance of the administration to question female faculty's behavior. To do so would bring on accusation of a "double standard" (possibly justified) and misogynist behavior. The "don't ask don't tell" was doubly in force and everybody knew it. I can't prove it but I am pretty sure that by the mid 80s there was much more going on than in the mid 70s.
Today many forms of sexual behavior that would have produced horror in "polite society" are normalized and unremarkable. In this background it is hard to imagine that any restriction on student and faculty behavior can really be enforced. The students want to be left alone to do as they wish. Most of the faculty feels the same. History has shown that sanctioning behavior that the majority (or even a significant minority) embrace is doomed to fail. Anything that is inside societal norms is going to de-facto be allowed. As a result, if it isn't literally illegal it will happen. So it is at Stanford, both "then" and "now", no matter what "the rules" may say.
The situation at the graduate school level was a bit different. At that level there were definitely women that at least attempted to use their gender and availability to get academic "special treatment". Most of the time it didn't work because it was transparently "fake". However, there were certain faculty that were publicly known to engage in this kind of activity. One department chair continually had a female graduate student as "consort". Everybody knew about it. His admins kept an office pool on who would be the next "queen" when the current one finished her thesis and moved on. I was providing computer assistance to his group and therefore was enough of an "outsider" that nobody worried about what I knew. I was surprised none of the other grad students complained. From what I could tell they mildly resented the situation but figured it wasn't worth the downside to rock the boat. Even if the "Administration" did something to stop it, the person who "talked" would always be "questionable" going forward. Better to just finish your degree and keep your mouth shut. All in all, he was a better PI than many others who didn't have a "favorite". At the higher levels of administration it obviously was a "don't ask, don't tell" situation. They had to know, but if it wasn't "official" they could let it go.
A second factor that limited this kind of activity back in the 60s and 70s was the fact that sexual activity outside of marriage was still frowned upon by a significant percentage of the population. While Stanford students and faculty in the main didn't share that belief, the parents and donors did. Therefore it was critical to either not engage in such activity or have enough clout you could hide it in plain sight. TAs were so far down the chain nobody would even notice and the administration could profess shock when and if somebody complained (which was very seldom). TAs were also easily replaceable. Junior faculty and above would be a more serious problem. Handling it as quietly as possible was undoubtedly the approach of choice.
By the 1980s there were lots more female students. There were also more female faculty members. One might think more female faculty members would reduce the problem. In fact, the opposite was true. Power is a heady drug regardless of gender. The female faculty also benefited from the decided reluctance of the administration to question female faculty's behavior. To do so would bring on accusation of a "double standard" (possibly justified) and misogynist behavior. The "don't ask don't tell" was doubly in force and everybody knew it. I can't prove it but I am pretty sure that by the mid 80s there was much more going on than in the mid 70s.
Today many forms of sexual behavior that would have produced horror in "polite society" are normalized and unremarkable. In this background it is hard to imagine that any restriction on student and faculty behavior can really be enforced. The students want to be left alone to do as they wish. Most of the faculty feels the same. History has shown that sanctioning behavior that the majority (or even a significant minority) embrace is doomed to fail. Anything that is inside societal norms is going to de-facto be allowed. As a result, if it isn't literally illegal it will happen. So it is at Stanford, both "then" and "now", no matter what "the rules" may say.