Sexual harassment, is intimidation, bullying or coercion of a sexual nature, or the unwelcome or inappropriate promise of rewards in exchange for sexual favors.In some contexts or circumstances, sexual harassment is illegal. It includes a range of behavior from seemingly mild transgressions and annoyances to actual sexual abuse or sexual assault. Sexual harassment is a form of illegal employment discrimination in many countries, and is a form of abuse (sexual and psychological) and bullying.
For many businesses and other organizations, preventing sexual
harassment, and defending employees from sexual harassment charges, have
become key goals of legal decision-making. Harassment situations
Sexual harassments can occur in a variety of circumstances. Often,
but not always, the harasser is in a position of power or authority over
the victim (due to differences in age, or social, political,
educational or employment relationships). Forms of harassment
relationships include:
- The harasser can be anyone, such as a client, a co-worker, a parent or legal guardian, a teacher or professor, a student, a friend, or a stranger.
- The victim does not have to be the person directly harassed but can be anyone who finds the behavior offensive and is affected by it.
- Adverse effects on the target are common
- The victim and harasser can be any gender.
- The harasser does not have to be of the opposite sex.
- The harasser may be completely unaware that his or her behavior is offensive or constitutes sexual harassment or may be completely unaware that his or her actions could be unlawful.
- Misunderstanding: It can result from a situation where one thinks he/she is making themselves clear, but is not understood the way they intended. The misunderstanding can either be reasonable or unreasonable. An example of unreasonable is when a man holds a certain stereotypical view of a woman such that he did not understand the woman’s explicit message to stop.(Heyman, 1994)
Varied behaviors
One of the difficulties in understanding sexual harassment is that it
involves a range of behavior, and is often difficult for the recipient
to describe to themselves, and to others, exactly what they are
experiencing. Moreover, behavior and motives vary between individual
harassers.
Behavioral classes
Dzeich et al. has divided harassers into two broad classes:
- Public harassers are flagrant in their seductive or sexist attitudes towards colleagues, subordinates, students, etc.
- Private harassers carefully cultivate a restrained and respectable image on the surface, but when alone with their target, their demeanor changes.
Langelan describes three different classes of harassers.
- Predatory harasser who gets sexual thrills from humiliating others. This harasser may become involved in sexual extortion, and may frequently harass just to see how targets respond. Those who don't resist may even become targets for rape.
- Dominance harasser: the most common type, who engages in harassing behaviour as an ego boost.
- strategic or **territorial harassers who seek to maintain privilege
in jobs or physical locations, for example a man's harassing female
employees in a predominantly male occupation.
Retaliation and backlash
Retaliation and backlash against a victim are very common,
particularly a complainant. Victims who speak out against sexual
harassment are often labeled troublemakers who are on their own power trips, or who are looking for attention. Similar to cases of rape or sexual assault, the victim often becomes the accused, with their appearance, private life, and character likely to fall under intrusive scrutiny and attack.
They risk hostility and isolation from colleagues, supervisors,
teachers, fellow students, and even friends. They may become the targets
of mobbing or relational aggression.
Women are not necessarily sympathetic to female complainants who have
been sexually harassed. If the harasser was male, internalized sexism,
and/or jealousy over the sexual attention towards the victim, may
encourage some women to react with as much hostility towards the
complainant as some male colleagues.Fear of being targeted for harassment or retaliation themselves may also cause some women to respond with hostility.
For example, when Lois Jenson filed her lawsuit against Eveleth
Taconite Co., the women placed a hangman's noose above her workplace,
and shunned
her both at work and in the community—many of these women later joined
her suit.(Bingham et al. 2002) Women may even project hostility onto the
victim in order to bond with their male coworkers and build trust.
Retaliation has occurred when a sexual harassment victim suffers a negative action as a result of the harassment. For example, a complainant be given poor evaluations or low grades, have their projects sabotaged,
be denied work or academic opportunities, have their work hours cut
back, and other actions against them which undermine their productivity,
or their ability to advance at work or school. They may be suspended,
asked to resign, or be fired
from their jobs altogether. Moreover, a professor or employer accused
of sexual harassment, or who is the colleague of a perpetrator, can use
their power to see that a victim is never hired again, or never accepted
to another school. Retaliation can even involve further sexual
harassment, and also stalking and cyberstalking of the victim.
Of the women who have approached her to share their own experiences of being sexually harassed by their teachers, feminist and writer Naomi Wolf writes,
"I am ashamed of what I tell them: that they should indeed worry about making an accusation because what they fear is likely to come true. Not one of the women I have heard from had an outcome that was not worse for her than silence. One, I recall, was drummed out of the school by peer pressure. Many faced bureaucratic stonewalling. Some women said they lost their academic status as golden girls overnight; grants dried up, letters of recommendation were no longer forthcoming. No one was met with a coherent process that was not weighted against them. Usually, the key decision-makers in the college or university—especially if it was a private university—joined forces to, in effect, collude with the faculty member accused; to protect not him necessarily but the reputation of the university, and to keep information from surfacing in a way that could protect other women. The goal seemed to be not to provide a balanced forum, but damage control."
Another woman who was interviewed by Helen Watson, a sociologist,
reported that, "Facing up to the crime and having to deal with it in
public is probably worse than suffering in silence. I found it to be a
lot worse than the harassment itself." (Watson, 1994)
Effects of sexual harassment and the (often) accompanying retaliation
Effects of sexual harassment can vary depending on the individual,
and the severity and duration of the harassment. Often, sexual
harassment incidents fall into the category of the "merely annoying."
However, many situations can, and do, have life-altering effects
particularly when they involve severe/chronic abuses, and/or retaliation
against a victim who does not submit to the harassment, or who
complains about it openly. Indeed, psychologists and social workers
report that severe/chronic sexual harassment can have the same
psychological effects as rape or sexual assault. (Koss, 1987) For
example, in 1995, Judith Coflin
committed suicide after chronic sexual harassment by her bosses and
coworkers. (Her family was later awarded 6 million dollars in punitive
and compensatory damages.) Backlash and victim-blaming can further
aggravate the effects. Moreover, every year, sexual harassment costs
hundreds of millions of dollars in lost educational and professional
opportunities, mostly for girls and women. (Boland, 2002) However, the
quantity of men implied in these conflicts is significant.
Common effects on the victims
Common professional, academic, financial, and social effects of sexual harassment:
- Decreased work or school performance; increased absenteeism
- Loss of job or career, loss of income
- Having to drop courses, change academic plans, or leave school (loss of tuition)
- Having one's personal life offered up for public scrutiny—the victim becomes the "accused," and his or her dress, lifestyle, and private life will often come under attack.
- Being objectified and humiliated by scrutiny and gossip
- Becoming publicly sexualized (i.e. groups of people "evaluate" the victim to establish if he or she is "worth" the sexual attention or the risk to the harasser's career)
- Defamation of character and reputation
- Loss of trust in environments similar to where the harassment occurred
- Loss of trust in the types of people that occupy similar positions as the harasser or his or her colleagues
- Extreme stress upon relationships with significant others, sometimes resulting in divorce; extreme stress on peer relationships, or relationships with colleagues
- Weakening of support network, or being ostracized from professional or academic circles (friends, colleagues, or family may distance themselves from the victim, or shun him or her altogether)
- Having to relocate to another city, another job, or another school
- Loss of references/recommendations
Some of the psychological and health effects that can occur in someone who has been sexually harassed: depression, anxiety and/or panic attacks, sleeplessness and/or nightmares, shame and guilt, difficulty concentrating, headaches, fatigue or loss of motivation, stomach problems, eating disorders (weight loss or gain), alcoholism,
feeling betrayed and/or violated, feeling angry or violent towards the
perpetrator, feeling powerless or out of control, increased blood
pressure, loss of confidence and self esteem, withdrawal and isolation, overall loss of trust in people, traumatic stress, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), complex post-traumatic stress disorder, suicidal thoughts or attempts, suicide.
Effects of sexual harassment on organizations
- Decreased productivity and increased team conflict
- Decrease in success at meeting financial goals (because of team conflict)
- Decreased job satisfaction
- Loss of staff and expertise from resignations to avoid harassment or resignations/firings of alleged harassers; loss of students who leave school to avoid harassment
- Decreased productivity and/or increased absenteeism by staff or students experiencing harassment
- Increased health care costs and sick pay costs because of the health consequences of harassment
- The knowledge that harassment is permitted can undermine ethical standards and discipline in the organization in general, as staff and/or students lose respect for, and trust in, their seniors who indulge in, or turn a blind eye to, sexual harassment
- If the problem is ignored, a company's or school's image can suffer
- Legal costs if the problem is ignored and complainants take the issue to court.(Boland 1990)
Prevention
Sexual harassment and assault may be prevented by secondary school, college,and workplace education programs.At least one program for fraternity men produced "sustained behavioral change."
The effect of the organization on sexual harassment
Studies show that organizational climate
(an organization’s tolerance, policy, procedure etc.) and workplace
environment are essential for understanding the conditions in which
sexual harassment is likely to occur, and the way its victims will be
affected (yet, research on specific policy and procedure and awareness
and prevention strategies is lacking). another element which increases
the risk for sexual harassment is the job’s gender context (having few
women in the close working environment or practicing in a field which is
atypical for women).
According to Dr. Orit Kamir,
the most effective way to avoid sexual harassment in the work place,
and also influence the public’s state of mind, is for the employer to
adopt a clear policy prohibiting sexual harassment and to make it very
clear to their employees . Many women prefer to make a complaint and to
have the matter resolved within the workplace rather than to “air out
the dirty laundry” with a public complaint and be seen as a traitor by
colleagues, superiors and employers, adds Kamir.See also: Rowe, Mary, "People Who Feel Harassed Need a Complaint System with both Formal and Informal Options," in Negotiation Journal,
April 1990, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 161–172., and Rowe, Mary, "Dealing with
Harassment: A Systems Approach," in Sexual Harassment: Perspectives,
Frontiers, and Response Strategies, Women & Work, Vol. 5, Margaret
Stockdale, editor, Sage Publications, 1996, pp. 241–271. Most prefer a
pragmatic solution that would stop the harassment and prevent future
contact with the harasser rather than turning to the police. More about
the difficulty in turning an offence into a legal act can be found in
Felstiner & Sarat’s (1981) study,
which describes three steps a victim (of any dispute) must go through
before turning to the justice system: naming – giving the assault a
definition, Blaming – understanding who is responsible for the violation
of rights and facing them, and finally, claiming – turning to the
authorities. In sexual offences there is great difficulty for the
victims to go through these steps, and the closer the relationship
between victim and assailant; the harder it is to take each step.
Evolution of sexual harassment law
United States
Workplace
In the US, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on race, sex, color, national origin or religion. Initially only intended to combat sexual harassment of women,{42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2} the prohibition of sex discrimination
covers both females and males. This discrimination occurs when the sex
of the worker is made as a condition of employment (i.e. all female
waitpersons or male carpenters) or where this is a job requirement that
does not mention sex but ends up barring many more persons of one sex
than the other from the job (such as height and weight limits).
Barnes v. Train
(1974) is commonly viewed as the first sexual harassment case in
America, even though the term "sexual harassment" was not used.In 1976, Williams v. Saxbe
established sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination when
sexual advances by a male supervisor towards a female employee, if
proven, would be deemed an artificial barrier to employment placed
before one gender and not another. In 1980 the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC) issued regulations defining sexual harassment and stating it was
a form of sex discrimination prohibited by the Civil Rights Act of
1964. In the 1986 case of Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson,
the Supreme Court first recognized "sexual harassment" as a violation
of Title VII, established the standards for analyzing whether the
conduct was welcome and levels of employer liability, and that speech or conduct in itself can create a "hostile environment". The Civil Rights Act of 1991 added provisions to Title VII protections including expanding the rights of women to sue and collect compensatory and punitive damages for sexual discrimination or harassment, and the case of Ellison v. Brady resulted in rejecting the reasonable person
standard in favor of the "reasonable woman standard" which allowed for
cases to be analyzed from the perspective of the complainant and not the
defendant. Also in 1991, Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co. became the first sexual harassment case to be given class action
status, paving the way for others. Seven years later, in 1998, this
case would establish new precedents for setting limits on the "discovery" process in sexual harassment cases, and allowing psychological injuries from the litigation process to be included in assessing damages awards. In the same year, the courts concluded in Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, Florida, and Burlington v. Ellerth, that employers are liable for harassment by their employees. Moreover, Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services
set the precedent for same-sex harassment, and sexual harassment
without motivation of "sexual desire", stating that any discrimination
based on sex is actionable so long as it places the victim in an
objectively disadvantageous working condition, regardless of the gender
of either the victim, or the harasser.
In the 2006 case of Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White,
the standard for retaliation against a sexual harassment complainant
was revised to include any adverse employment decision or treatment that
would be likely to dissuade a "reasonable worker" from making or
supporting a charge of discrimination.
During 2007 alone, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
and related state agencies received 12,510 new charges of sexual
harassment on the job.
Education
Main article: Sexual harassment in education in the United States
Title IX
of the Education Amendments of 1972 (United States) states "No person
in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to
discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal
financial assistance."
In Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools
(1992), the U.S. Supreme Court held that private citizens could collect
damage awards when teachers sexually harassed their students. In Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser
(1986) the courts ruled that schools have the power to discipline
students if they use "obscene, profane language or gestures" which could
be viewed as substantially interfering with the educational process,
and inconsistent with the "fundamental values of public school
education." Under regulations issued in 1997 by the U.S. Department of Education, which administers Title IX,
school districts should be held responsible for harassment by educators
if the harasser "was aided in carrying out the sexual harassment of
students by his or her position of authority with the institution." In Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, and Murrell v. School Dist. No. 1,
1999, schools were assigned liability for peer-to-peer sexual
harassment if the plaintiff sufficiently demonstrated that the
administration's response shows "deliberate indifference" to "actual
knowledge" of discrimination.
Evolution of sexual harassment law in other jurisdictions
In India, the case of Vishaka Vs. State of Rajasthan in 1997 has been credited with establishing sexual harassment as illegal.In Israel, the 1988 Equal Employment Opportunity Law made it a crime
for an employer to retaliate against an employee who had rejected sexual
advances, but it wasn't until 1998 that the Israeli Sexual Harassment
Law made such behavior illegal. (Kamir, 2005)
In May 2002, the European
Union Council and Parliament amended a 1976 Council Directive on the
equal treatment of men and women in employment to prohibit sexual
harassment in the workplace, naming it a form of sex discrimination and
violation of dignity. This Directive required all Member States of the
European Union to adopt laws on sexual harassment, or amend existing
laws to comply with the Directive by October 2005.
In 2005, China added new provisions to the Law on Women's Right Protection to include sexual harassment.In 2006 "The Shanghai Supplement" was drafted to help further define sexual harassment in China.
Varied legal guidelines and definitions
The United Nations General Recommendation 19 to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women defines sexual harassment of women to include:
"such unwelcome sexually determined behavior as physical contact and advances, sexually colored remarks, showing pornography and sexual demands, whether by words or actions. Such conduct can be humiliating and may constitute a health and safety problem; it is discriminatory when the woman has reasonable ground to believe that her objection would disadvantage her in connection with her employment, including recruitment or promotion, or when it creates a hostile working environment."
While such conduct can be harassment of women by men, many laws
around the world which prohibit sexual harassment recognize that both
men and women may be harassers or victims of sexual harassment. However,
most claims of sexual harassment are made by women.
There are many similarities, and also important differences in laws
and definitions used around the world. After covering one country in
some detail (the United States), approaches in other countries are
covered alphabetically.
Australia
The Sex Discrimination Act 1984 defines sexual harassment as "...
unwanted conduct of a sexual nature, in circumstances in which a
reasonable person, having regard to all the circumstances, would have
anticipated that the person harassed would be offended, humiliated or
intimidated."
Czech Republic
Undesirable behavior of a sexual nature at the workplace if such
conduct is unwelcome, unsuitable or insulting, or if it can be
justifiably perceived by the party concerned as a condition for
decisions affecting the exercise of rights and obligations ensuring from
labor relations.
Denmark
Sexual harassment is defined as, when any verbal, non-verbal or
physical action is used to change a victim's sexual status against the
will of the victim and resulting in the victim feeling inferior or
hurting the victim's dignity. Man and woman are looked upon as equal,
and any action trying to change the balance in status with the
differences in sex as a tool, is also sexual harassment. In the
workplace, jokes, remarks, etc., are only deemed discriminatory if the
employer has stated so in their written policy. Women are viewed as
being responsible for confronting harassment themselves, such as by
slapping the harasser in the face. Law number 1385 of December 21, 2005
regulates this area.
France
Article 222-33 of the French Criminal Code describes sexual
harassment as, "The fact of harassing anyone using orders, threats or
constraint, in order to obtain favors of a sexual nature, by a person
abusing the authority that functions confer on him..." This means the
harasser can only be someone with authority on the harassed (basically,
there can't be sexual harassment between coworkers of the same rank).
However, moral harassment occurs when an employee is subjected to
repeated acts (one is not enough) the aim or effect of which may result
in a degradation (deterioration) of his conditions of employment that
might undermine his rights and his dignity, affect his physical or
mental health or jeopardize his professional future. Sexual as well as
the moral harassment is recognized by the law.
India
Further information: Sexism in India
Sexual harassment in India is termed "Eve teasing"
and is described as: unwelcome sexual gesture or behaviour whether
directly or indirectly as sexually coloured remarks; physical contact
and advances; showing pornography; a demand or request for sexual
favours; any other unwelcome physical, verbal/non-verbal conduct being
sexual in nature. The critical factor is the unwelcomeness of the
behaviour, thereby making the impact of such actions on the recipient
more relevant rather than intent of the perpetrator.According to India's constitution, sexual harassment infringes the
fundamental right of a woman to gender equality under Article 14 of the
Constitution of India and her right to life and live with dignity under
Article 21 of the Constitution.Although there is no specific law against sexual harassment at
workplace in India but many provisions in other legislations protect
against sexual harassment at workplace, such as Section 354, IPC deals
with “assault or criminal force to a woman with the intent to outrage
her modesty, and Section 509, IPC deals with “word, gesture or act
intended to insult the modesty of a woman.
Israel
The 1998 Israeli Sexual Harassment Law interprets sexual harassment
broadly, and prohibits the behavior as a discriminatory practice, a
restriction of liberty, an offence to human dignity, a violation of
every person's right to elementary respect, and an infringement of the
right to privacy. Additionally, the law prohibits intimidation or
retaliation that accommodates sexual harassment. Intimidation or
retaliation thus related to sexual harassment are defined by the law as
"prejudicial treatment". (Kamir, 2005)
Pakistan
Pakistan has adopted a Code of Conduct for Gender Justice in the
Workplace that will deal with cases of sexual harassment. The Alliance
Against Sexual Harassment At workplace (AASHA) announced they would be
working with the committee to establish guidelines for the proceedings.
AASHA defines sexual harassment much the same as it is defined in the
U.S. and other cultures.
Philippines
The Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995 was enacted "primarily to
protect and respect the dignity of workers, employees, and applicants
for employment as well as students in educational institutions or
training centers. This law, consisting of ten sections, provides for a
clear definition of work, education or training-related sexual
harassment and specifies the acts constituting sexual harassment. It
likewise provides for the duties and liabilities of the employer in
cases of sexual harassment, and sets penalties for violations of its
provisions. It is to be noted that a victim of sexual harassment is not
barred from filing a separate and independent action for damages and
other relief aside from filing the charge for sexual harassment."
No comments:
Post a Comment