Sexual harassment

From New World Encyclopedia


Sexual harassment is harassment or unwelcome attention of a sexual nature. It includes a range of behavior from mild transgressions and annoyances to serious abuses, which can even involve forced sexual activity. Sexual harassment is considered a form of illegal discrimination in many countries, and is a form of abuse (sexual and psychological) and bullying.

Evolution of sexual harassment law

United States

Workplace

In the United States, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on race, sex, color, national origin or religion. The prohibition of sex discrimination covers both females and males, but the origin of the law was to protect women in the workplace and that is its main emphasis today. This discrimination occurs when the sex of the worker is made as a condition of employment (i.e. all male waiters or 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.[1] 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 Michelle Vinson v. Merit One Savings Bank, 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 (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 at 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.

Education

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."[2] 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.

Other jurisdictions

Many jurisdictions outside the United States have adopted their own definitions of sexual harassment, intended to cover essentially the same forms of undesirable conduct. However, if a country has officially outlawed sexual harassment, most define the behavior similarly to that of the U.S., some examples below:

  • 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.[3]
  • 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 vectim 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. [4]
  • 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..." 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.[5]
  • India: Sexual harassment in India )and Pakistan)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.
  • 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 (AASH) announced they would be working with the committee to establish guidelines for the proceedings. AASH defines sexual harassment much the same as it is defined in the U.S. and other cultures.[6]
  • Poland: There is no special provision in the employment law that provides for moral or sexual harassment; however it is commonly accepted by the jurisprudence, that sexual harassment occurs when the employee is subjected to acts of another person in order to obtain favours of a sexual nature. Moral harassment occurs when en employee is subjected to acts which may result in a deterioration of his conditions of employment or undermine his rights and dignity as well as affect his physical or moral health. These definitions are not legal ones, but definitions accepted by the jurisprudence.
  • Russia: In the Criminal Code, Russian Federation, (CC RF), there exists a law which prohibits utilization of an office position and material dependence for coercion of sexual interactions (Article 118, current CC RF). However, according to the Moscow Center for Gender Studies, in practice, the courts do not examine these issues.[7]
  • United Kingdom: The Discrimination Act of 1975, was modified to establish sexual harassment as a form of discrimination in 1986. [8] It states that harassment occurs where there is unwanted conduct on the ground of a person's sex or unwanted conduct of a sexual nature and that conduct has the purpose or effect of violating a person's dignity, or of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them. If an employer treats someone less favourably because they have rejected, or submitted to, either form of harassment described above, this is also harassment.[9]

Range of behavior and circumstances

Varied circumstances

Sexual harassment can occur in a variety of circumstances. The harasser can be anyone, such as a supervisor, a client, a co-worker, 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. While adverse effects on the victim are common, this does not have to be the case for the behavior to be unlawful. The victim can be male or female. The harasser can be male or female. 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.

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 (Dzeich et al 1990) has divided harassers into two broad classes: public and private. 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 completely.

Langelan describes three different classes of harassers. First there is the 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. Next, there is the dominance harasser, the most common type, who engages in harassing behaviour as an ego boost. Third are 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. (Langelan, 1993)

Attorney Mary Jo McGrath describes "The Winner" as a common profile that confuses harassment victims and others in the community because they do not seem like the type who would need to abuse anyone. An adult male harasser is often middle aged, married with children, a churchgoer, and someone who is highly respected in the community. A teacher who sexually harasses students may have been named "Teacher of the Year" or be Chair of their department. A young harasser may be captain of the football team, an honor student sure to attend an Ivy League school, or some other young person who thinks they have everything going for him or her (and so does everyone else). McGrath writes that sexual harassment and abuse "are acts of violence and domination, not sensuality and flirtation. These acts are calculated to dominate and control, not enhance the enjoyment and safety of the targeted person ... The violator may be very high functioning in all other areas of his or her life, but is driven within this realm to act out needs inappropriately."[10]

Brian Martin, an Australian associate professor of Science, Technology and Society writes "Most harassers don't try to justify their behaviour; they don't think about it. If asked, they may say they are just having fun and don't cause any harm. A few, though, consciously seek to humiliate their victims."[11]

Sexualized environments (aka environmental harassment)

Sexualized environments are environments where obscenities, sexual joking, sexually explicit graffiti, viewing Internet pornography, sexually degrading posters and objects, etc., are common. None of these behaviors or objects may necessarily be directed at anyone in particular. However, they can create an offensive environment, and one that is consistent with “hostile environment sexual harassment." For example, in the case of Morse v. Future Reality Ltd. in the United Kingdom(1996), the female complainant was awarded compensation after her superiors ignored her complaint that her office mates spent much time studying sexually explicit images downloaded from the Internet, and creating a “general atmosphere of obscenity” in the office. EOC: Sexual Harassment: case decisions Sexualized environments have also been shown to create atmospheres that encourage more serious and direct sexual harassment. For example, when obscenities are common in the workplace, women are 3 times more likely to be treated as sex objects, and be directly sexually harassed than in environments where profanity is not tolerated. And when sexual joking is common, sexual harassment is 3 to 7 times more likely. (Boland, 2002)

Rituals and initiations

Sexual harassment can also occur in group settings as part of rituals or ceremonies, such as when members engage newcomers in abusive or sexually explicit rites as part of hazing or initiation. While such traditions have historically remained in arenas of male-bonding, such as team sports and fraternities, it is becoming increasingly common for girls/women's groups to engage in similar ceremonies.[12] For example, as women’s sports become more widespread, some have begun to mimic the hazing and other practices characteristic of traditional men’s sports in order to try to be accepted by men in sport.[13] While some suggest such activities are just “a joke”; others consider it degrading, insulting and even threatening—especially for many young people who have experienced sexual harassment, sexual abuse, stalking or rape. Young people who lack confidence, or who are confused about their identity, may fall victim to such practices more easily than those who are self-assured.

Workplace

Quid pro quo sexual harassment

In the workplace, this occurs when a job benefit is directly tied to an employee submitting to unwelcome sexual advances. For example, a supervisor promises an employee a raise if she will go out on a date with him, or tells an employee she will be fired if she doesn't sleep with him.[14] Quid pro quo harassment also occurs when an employee makes an evaluative decision, or provides or withholds professional opportunities based on another employee's submission to verbal, nonverbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.  Quid pro quo harassment is equally unlawful whether the victim resists and suffers the threatened harm or submits and thus avoids the threatened harm.[15]

Hostile environment sexual harassment

This occurs when an employee is subjected to comments of a sexual nature, unwelcome physical contact, or offensive sexual materials as a regular part of the work environment. For the most part, a single isolated incident will not be enough to prove hostile environment harassment unless it involves extremely outrageous and egregious conduct. The courts will try to decide whether the conduct is both "serious" and "frequent." Supervisors, managers, co-workers and even customers can be responsible for creating a hostile environment.[16] Probably the most famous hostile environment sexual harassment case to date is Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co. which inspired the movie North Country.

The line between "quid pro quo" and "hostile environment" harassment is not always clear and the two forms of harassment often occur together. For example, an employee's job conditions are affected when a sexually hostile work environment results in a constructive discharge. At the same time, a supervisor who makes sexual advances toward a subordinate employee may communicate an implicit threat to retaliate against her if she does not comply.[17]

"Hostile environment" harassment may acquire characteristics of "quid pro quo" harassment if the offending supervisor abuses his authority over employment decisions to force the victim to endure or participate in the sexual conduct. Sexual harassment may culminate in a retaliatory discharge if a victim tells the harasser or her employer she will no longer submit to the harassment, and is then fired in retaliation for this protest. Under these circumstances it would be appropriate to conclude that both harassment and retaliation in violation of section 704(a) of Title VII have occurred."

Retaliation

Retaliation has occurred when an employee suffers a negative action after they make a report of sexual harassment, file a grievance, assist someone else with a complaint, or participate in discrimination prevention activities. Negative actions can include being fired, demotion, suspension, denial of promotion, poor evaluation, unfavorable job re-assignment—any adverse employment decision or treatment that would be likely to dissuade a "reasonable worker" from making or supporting a charge of discrimination. (See Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White) Retaliation is as illegal as the sexual harassment itself, but also as difficult to prove. Also, retalition is illegal even if the original charge of sexual harassment was not proven.

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)[18][19]

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. (Note: this rarely occurs for the perpetrator.)
  • Being objectified and humiliated by scrutiny and gossip
  • Becoming publicly sexualized (i.e. groups of people "evaluate" the victim to establish if they are "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 their 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 them 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), 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.[20]

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. [21] 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.[22] Fear of being targeted for harassment or retaliation themselves may also cause some women to respond with hostility.[23] 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. [23][22]

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."[24]

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)

Statistics

Sexual harassment in the workplace

Approximately 15,000 sexual harassment cases are brought to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) each year. Media and government surveys estimate the percentage of women being sexually harassed in the U.S. workplace at 40% to 60%. The European Women's Lobby reports that between 40 and 50 % of female employees have experienced some form of sexual harassment or unwanted sexual behavior in the workplace.[25] While the majority of sexual harassment complaints come from women, the number of complaints filed by men is rapidly increasing. In 2004, over 15% of EEOC complaints were filed by men with 11% of claims involving men filing against female supervisors.[26][27] A 2006 government study in the United Kingdom revealed that 2 out of 5 sexual harassment victims are male, with 8% percent of all sexual harassment complaints to the Equal Opportunities Commission (Britain's EEOC), coming from men.[28] A 2007 study in Hong Kong reported that one third of sexual harassment victims are males being targeted by female supervisors. [29] 'It affects both women and men, causing stress, health problems and financial penalties when they leave their jobs to avoid it,' said Jenny Watson, chair of the EOC.[30]

Sexual harassment in education

A 2002 study of students in the 8th through the 11th grade by the American Association of University Women (AAUW) revealed that 83% of girls have been sexually harassed, and 78% of boys have been sexually harassed. [31]In their 2006 study on sexual harassment at colleges and universities, the AAUW reported that 62% of female college students and 61% of male college students report having been sexually harassed at their university, with 80% of the reported harassment being peer-to-peer. 51% of male college students admit to sexually harassing someone in college, with 22% admitting to harassing someone often or occasionally. 31% percent of female college students admitted to harassing someone in college.[32] In a 2000 national survey conducted for the AAUW, it was reported that roughly 290,000 students experienced some sort of physical sexual abuse or harassment by a public school employee, such as a teacher or coach, between 1991 and 2000. In a major 2004 study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education, nearly 10 percent of U.S. public school students were shown to have been targeted with unwanted sexual attention by school employees.[33] In their 2002 study, the AAUW reported that 38% percent of the students were sexually harassed by teachers or school employees.[31]

However, it is important to acknowledge that statistics do not give a complete picture of the pervasiveness of the problem as most sexual harassment situations go unreported. (Boland 2002, Dzeich 1990)

Debates

Though the phrase "sexual harassment" is generally acknowledged to include clearly damaging and morally deplorable behavior, its boundaries can be broad and controversial. Accordingly, misunderstandings can abound. Moreover, sexual harassment law has been highly criticized by experts, such as Alan Dershowitz and Eugene Volokh, for imposing on the right to free speech.[34] Some feminist groups criticize sexual harassment policy as helping maintain archaic stereotypes of women as "delicate, asexual creatures" who require special protection.[35] Camille Paglia has even gone as far as to blame young girls if they are sexually harassed, saying their own "niceness" provokes it. Paglia commented in an interview with Playboy, "Realize the degree to which your niceness may invoke people to say lewd and pornographic things to you—sometimes to violate your niceness. The more you blush, the more people want to do it."[36]

Sexual harassment policy and legislation have been criticized as attempts to "regulate romance" which goes against "human urges." Other critics assert that sexual harassment is a very serious problem, but current views focus too heavily on sexuality rather than on the type of conduct that undermines the ability of women or men to work together effectively. Viki Shultz, a law professor at Yale University comments, "Many of the most prevalent forms of harassment are designed to maintain work-particularly the more highly rewarded lines of work-as bastions of male competence and authority."[37] Feminist Jane Gallop sees this evolution of the definition of sexual harassment as coming from a "split" between what she calls "power feminists" who are pro-sex (like herself) and what she calls "victim feminists," who are not. She argues that the split has helped lead to a perversion of the definition of sexual harassment, which used to be about sexism but has come to be about anything that's sexual. (Gallop, 1997)

There is also concern over "abuses" of sexual harassment policy, and employers and administrators using accusations as a way of expelling employees they want to eliminate for other reasons. (Westhues, 1998).

Notes

  1. The Sad Evolution of Sexual Harassment iFeminists. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  2. Sexual Harassment Guidance Office for Civil Rights. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  3. Employment Law in Each Country International Law Firms Association. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  4. Denmark Law (Danish) Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  5. Sexual Harassment in the Workplace in France and in the United States NLA Review. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  6. AASHA - (Pakistan) Alliance Against Sexual Harassment July 17, 2007.
  7. Sexual Harassment in Russian Workplaces Sexual Harassment Support Forum. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  8. Strathclyde Regional Council v Porcelli [1986 IRLR 134 Court of Session] Equal Opportunities Commission. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  9. Sexual Harassment: what the law says Equal Opportunities Commission. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  10. The Early Warning Signs of Sexual Harassment and Abuse In School McGrath Systems, Inc. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  11. Sexual Harassment and Nonviolent Action University of Wollongon. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  12. Why is Hazing a Problem? StopHazing. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  13. Position Statement Women Sport International. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  14. The Law & Your Job: What is quid pro quo harassment? American Bar Association. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  15. Sexual Harassment In The Workplace Sexual Harassment Support. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  16. The Law & Your Job: What is hostile environment harassment? American Bar Association. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  17. Policy Guidance on Current Issues of Sexual Harassment US Equal Opportunity Commission. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  18. Sexual harassment bad for victims and for business Queen's University. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  19. Sexual harassment: Poisoning profit prospects Ottawa Business Journal. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  20. Common Effects of Sexual Harassment Women's Crisis Support Services. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  21. Sexual harassment too often leads to humiliation for victims Monitor on Psychology. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  22. 22.0 22.1 Dealing With Sexual Harassment Women's Crisis Support Services. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  23. 23.0 23.1 Sexual harassment retaliation, backlash, and victim blaming Sexual Harassment Support. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  24. The Silent Treatment New York Magazine. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  25. Facts and Figures about gender equality in Europe European Women's Lobby. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  26. More men say they are sexually harassed at work USA Today. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  27. US EEOC: Sexual Harassment US Equal Opportunity Commission.
  28. Sexual harassment of men revealed Guardian Unlimited. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  29. Daily India Sexual Harassment Daily India. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  30. Sexual harassment of men revealed Guardian Unlimited. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  31. 31.0 31.1 Hostile Hallways: Bullying, Teasing, and Sexual Harassment in School American Association of University Women. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  32. Drawing the Line: Sexual Harassment on Campus American Association of University Women. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  33. What's behind today's epidemic of teacher-student sex? WorldNetDaily. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  34. Freedom of Speech vs. Workplace Harassment Law UCLA Law School. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  35. Feminism and Free Speech Feminists for Free Expression. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  36. Playboy interview, Camille Paglia Playboy. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
  37. Love, Lust, and the Law Sexual Harassment in the Academy American Association of University Professors. Retrieved July 17, 2007.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • American Association of University Women. Hostile Hallways: Bullying, Teasing, and Sexual Harassment in School. AAUW, 2002.
  • American Association of University Women. Drawing the Line: Sexual Harassment on Campus. AAUW,2006.
  • Bingham, Clara, Gansler, Laura Leedy. Class Action: The Landmark Case that Changed Sexual Harassment Law. New York, Anchor Books, 2002.
  • Boland, Mary L. Sexual Harassment: Your Guide to Legal Action. Naperville, Illinois: Sphinx Publishing, 2002.
  • Dziech, Billie Wright, Weiner, Linda. The Lecherous Professor: Sexual Harassment on Campus. Chicago Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1990.
  • Gallop, Jane. Feminist Accused of Sexual Harassment. Duke University Press, 1997.
  • Kamir, Orit. "Israel's 1998 Sexual Harassment Law: Prohibiting Sexual Harassment, Sexual Stalking, and Degradation Based on Sexual Orientation in the Workplace and in all Social Settings." International Journal of Discrimination and Law, 2005, 7 , 315-336.
  • Koss, Mary P. "Changed Lives: The Psychological Impact of Sexual Harassment." in Paludi, Michele A. ed. Ivory Power: Sexual Harassment On Campus. Albany, NY, State University of New York Press, 1987.
  • Langelan, Martha. Back Off: How to Confront and Stop Sexual Harassment and Harassers. Fireside, 1993
  • Patai, Daphne. Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 1999.
  • Watson, Helen. "Red herrings and mystifications: Conflicting perceptions of sexual harassment," in Brant, Clare, and Too, Yun Lee, eds., Rethinking Sexual Harassment. Boulder, Colorado, Pluto Press, 1994.
  • Westhues, Kenneth. Eliminating Professors: A Guide to the Dismissal Process. Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1998.


External links


Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.