sexual harassment essay body

Essay on Sexual Harassment

500 words essay on sexual harassment.

Sexual harassment refers to any form of unwelcome sexual behaviour which is offensive, humiliating and intimidating. Further, it is against the law to sexually harass anyone. Over the years, sexual harassment has taken a lot of time to be recognized as a real issue. Nonetheless, it is a start that can protect people from this harassment. The essay on sexual harassment will take you through the details.

Sexual Harassment and Its Impacts

Sexual harassment comes in many forms and not just a single one. It includes when someone tries to touch, grab or make other physical contacts with you without your consent. Further, it also includes passing comments which have a sexual meaning.

After that, it is also when someone asks you for sexual favours. Leering and staring continuously also counts as one. You are being sexually harassed when the perpetrator displays rude and offensive material so that others can see it.

Another form is making sexual gestures towards you and cracking sexual jokes or comments towards you. It is also not acceptable for someone to question you about your sexual life or insult you with sexual comments.

Further, making an obscene phone call or indecently exposing oneself also counts as sexual harassment. Sexual harassment can impact a person severely. It may stress out the victim and they may suffer from anxiety or depression.

Moreover, it can also cause them to withdraw from social situations. After that, the victim also starts to lose confidence and self-esteem. There may also be physical symptoms like headaches, sleep problems and being not able to concentrate or be productive.

What Can We Do

No one in this world deserves to go through sexual harassment, whether man or woman. We all have the right to live freely without being harassed, bullied or discriminated against. It is the reason why sexual harassment is illegal.

To begin with, the person may try talking to the offender and convey their message regarding their unwanted behaviour. Further, it is also essential to stay informed about this issue. Make sure to learn about the policies and procedures regarding sexual harassment in your workplace, school or university.

Further, try to document everything to help you remember the name of the offenders and the incidents. Similarly, make sure to save any evidence you get which will help with your complaint. For instance, keeping the text messages, emails, photos or more.

Most importantly, always try to get external information and advice from people who will help you if you decide to file a lawsuit. Likewise, never deal with it on your own and share it with someone you trust to lighten your load.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Conclusion of the Essay on Sexual Harassment

To conclude, sexual harassment is a very real issue that went unnoticed for a long period of time, but not anymore. It is essential for all of us to take measures to prevent it from happening as it damages the life of the victim severely. Thus, make sure you help out those who are suffering from sexual harassment and make the perpetrator accountable.

FAQ of Essay on Sexual Harassment

Question 1: What are the effects of sexual harassment?

Answer 1: Sexual harassment has major effects on the victim like suffering from significant psychological effects which include anxiety, depression , headaches, sleep disorders, lowered self-esteem, sexual dysfunction and more.

Question 2: How do you tell if someone is sexually harassing you?

Answer 2: It is essential to notice the signs if you feel someone is sexually harassing you. The most important sign is if you feel uncomfortable and experience any unwanted physical contact. If your ‘no’ does not have an impact and you’re being subjected to sexual jokes, you are being sexually harassed.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Sexual Harassment

You should be able to feel comfortable in your place of work or learning. If you are being sexually harassed, you can report it to the authorities at your job or school.

What is sexual harassment?

Sexual harassment includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature in the workplace or learning environment, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ). Sexual harassment does not always have to be specifically about sexual behavior or directed at a specific person. For example, negative comments about women as a group may be a form of sexual harassment.

Although sexual harassment laws do not usually cover teasing or offhand comments, these behaviors can also be upsetting and have a negative emotional effect.

What does sexual harassment look like?

Sexual harassment can occur in a variety of circumstances. The harasser can identify with any gender and have any relationship to the victim, including being a direct manager, indirect supervisor, coworker, teacher, peer, or colleague.

Some forms of sexual harassment include:

• Making conditions of employment or advancement dependent on sexual favors, either explicitly or implicitly.
• Physical acts of sexual assault.
• Requests for sexual favors.
• Verbal harassment of a sexual nature, including jokes referring to sexual acts or sexual orientation.
• Unwanted touching or physical contact.
• Unwelcome sexual advances.
• Discussing sexual relations/stories/fantasies at work, school, or in other inappropriate places.
• Feeling pressured to engage with someone sexually.
• Exposing oneself or performing sexual acts on oneself.
• Unwanted sexually explicit photos, emails, or text messages.

What is the difference between sexual harassment and sexual assault? What about sexual misconduct?

Sexual harassment is a broad term, including many types of unwelcome verbal and physical sexual attention. Sexual assault refers to sexual contact or behavior, often physical, that occurs without the consent of the victim. Sexual harassment generally violates civil laws—you have a right to work or learn without being harassed—but in many cases is not a criminal act, while sexual assault usually refers to acts that are criminal. Some forms of sexual assault include:

• Penetration of the victim’s body, also known as rape.
• Attempted rape.
• Forcing a victim to perform sexual acts, such as oral sex or penetration of the perpetrator’s body.
• Fondling or unwanted sexual touching.

Sexual misconduct is a non-legal term used informally to describe a broad range of behaviors, which may or may not involve harassment. For example, some companies prohibit sexual relationships between coworkers, or between an employee and their boss, even if the relationship is consensual.

Where can sexual harassment occur?

Sexual harassment can occur in the workplace or learning environment, like a school or university. It can happen in many different scenarios, including after-hours conversations, exchanges in the hallways, and non-office settings of employees or peers.

What can I do when I witness sexual harassment?

You may have heard the term  bystander intervention  to describe stepping in to help if you see someone who might be in danger or at risk for sexual assault. Bystander intervention can also be a helpful strategy if you witness sexual harassment. You don’t have to be a hero to make a positive impact in someone’s life, and you can intervene in a way that fits your comfort level and is appropriate for the situation. If you choose to step in, you may be able to give the person being harassed a chance to get to a safe place or leave the situation. Below are some of the steps you can take if you see someone being sexually harassed—just remember to C.A.R.E., and of course, keep your own safety in mind at all times.

• Create a distraction.  Do what you can to interrupt the harassment, or distract those taking part in the harassment. But remember to make sure that you aren’t putting yourself in danger by doing this. If someone seems like they could become violent, do not draw their attention.
• Ask directly.  Talk directly with the person who is being harassed. If they are being harassed at work or school, offer to accompany them anytime they have to meet with the harasser. If a friend is worried about walking alone to their car at night, offer to walk with them.
• Refer to an authority.  The safest way to intervene for both you and the person being harassed may be to bring in an authority figure. You can talk to another employee, security guard, RA in your dorm, bartender, or bouncer, and they will often be willing to step in.
• Enlist others.  It can be hard to step in alone, especially if you are worried about your own safety or if you don’t think you will be able to help on your own. It may be a good idea to enlist the help of a friend or another bystander.

What are some effects of sexual harassment?

Experiencing sexual harassment may cause some survivors to face emotional, physical, or mental health concerns. Some of them might include:

For more resources and information from RAINN about sexual harassment, visit That's Harassment .

Emotional effects:

• Humiliation
• Powerlessness and loss of control

Mental health effects:

• Panic attacks
• Difficulty concentrating
• Loss of motivation
• Substance abuse
• Suicidal ideation

Physical effects:

• Increased stress levels
• Sleep disturbances
• Eating disturbances

Where can I learn more about sexual harassment?

• Visit the  Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)  to learn more about sexual harassment laws and your rights in the workplace.
• If you are a minor, you can learn more at  Youth at Work , EEOC’s website for youth in the workforce.

To speak with someone who is trained to help, call the National Sexual Assault Hotline at 800.656.HOPE (4673) or chat online at  online.rainn.org .

Related Content

Sexual exploitation by helping professionals.

Sexual exploitation by a helping professional is a serious violation of your trust and, in many cases, the law.

Sexual Assault

Sexual assault can take many different forms and be defined in different ways, but one thing remains the same: it’s never the victim’s fault.

Learn more about stalking behaviors to help you notice them before they escalate—and take steps to protect yourself.

Subscribe to Policy News

More than 87 cents of every $1 goes to helping survivors and preventing sexual violence..

Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2018)

Chapter: 7 findings, conclusions, and recommendations, 7 findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

Preventing and effectively addressing sexual harassment of women in colleges and universities is a significant challenge, but we are optimistic that academic institutions can meet that challenge—if they demonstrate the will to do so. This is because the research shows what will work to prevent sexual harassment and why it will work. A systemwide change to the culture and climate in our nation’s colleges and universities can stop the pattern of harassing behavior from impacting the next generation of women entering science, engineering, and medicine.

Changing the current culture and climate requires addressing all forms of sexual harassment, not just the most egregious cases; moving beyond legal compliance; supporting targets when they come forward; improving transparency and accountability; diffusing the power structure between faculty and trainees; and revising organizational systems and structures to value diversity, inclusion, and respect. Leaders at every level within academia will be needed to initiate these changes and to establish and maintain the culture and norms. However, to succeed in making these changes, all members of our nation’s college campuses—students, faculty, staff, and administrators—will need to assume responsibility for promoting a civil and respectful environment. It is everyone’s responsibility to stop sexual harassment.

In this spirit of optimism, we offer the following compilation of the report’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Chapter 2: sexual harassment research.

• Sexual harassment is a form of discrimination that consists of three types of harassing behavior: (1) gender harassment (verbal and nonverbal behaviors that convey hostility, objectification, exclusion, or second-class status about members of one gender); (2) unwanted sexual attention (unwelcome verbal or physical sexual advances, which can include assault); and (3) sexual coercion (when favorable professional or educational treatment is conditioned on sexual activity). The distinctions between the types of harassment are important, particularly because many people do not realize that gender harassment is a form of sexual harassment.
• Sexually harassing behavior can be either direct (targeted at an individual) or ambient (a general level of sexual harassment in an environment) and is harmful in both cases. It is considered illegal when it creates a hostile environment (gender harassment or unwanted sexual attention that is “severe or pervasive” enough to alter the conditions of employment, interfere with one’s work performance, or impede one’s ability to get an education) or when it is quid pro quo sexual harassment (when favorable professional or educational treatment is conditioned on sexual activity).
• There are reliable scientific methods for determining the prevalence of sexual harassment. To measure the incidence of sexual harassment, surveys should follow the best practices that have emerged from the science of sexual harassment. This includes use of the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire, the most widely used and well-validated instrument available for measuring sexual harassment; assessment of specific behaviors without requiring the respondent to label the behaviors “sexual harassment”; focus on first-hand experience or observation of behavior (rather than rumor or hearsay); and focus on the recent past (1–2 years, to avoid problems of memory decay). Relying on the number of official reports of sexual harassment made to an organization is not an accurate method for determining the prevalence.
• Some surveys underreport the incidence of sexual harassment because they have not followed standard and valid practices for survey research and sexual harassment research.
• While properly conducted surveys are the best methods for estimating the prevalence of sexual harassment, other salient aspects of sexual harassment and its consequences can be examined using other research methods , such as behavioral laboratory experiments, interviews, case studies, ethnographies, and legal research. Such studies can provide information about the presence and nature of sexually harassing behavior in an organization, how it develops and continues (and influences the organizational climate), and how it attenuates or amplifies outcomes from sexual harassment.
• Women experience sexual harassment more often than men do.
• Gender harassment (e.g., behaviors that communicate that women do not belong or do not merit respect) is by far the most common type of sexual harassment. When an environment is pervaded by gender harassment, unwanted sexual attention and sexual coercion become more likely to occur—in part because unwanted sexual attention and sexual coercion are almost never experienced by women without simultaneously experiencing gender harassment.
• Men are more likely than women to commit sexual harassment.
• Coworkers and peers more often commit sexual harassment than do superiors.
• Sexually harassing behaviors are not typically isolated incidents; rather, they are a series or pattern of sometimes escalating incidents and behaviors.
• Women of color experience more harassment (sexual, racial/ethnic, or combination of the two) than white women, white men, and men of color do. Women of color often experience sexual harassment that includes racial harassment.
• Sexual- and gender-minority people experience more sexual harassment than heterosexual women do.
• The two characteristics of environments most associated with higher rates of sexual harassment are (a) male-dominated gender ratios and leadership and (b) an organizational climate that communicates tolerance of sexual harassment (e.g., leadership that fails to take complaints seriously, fails to sanction perpetrators, or fails to protect complainants from retaliation).
• Organizational climate is, by far, the greatest predictor of the occurrence of sexual harassment, and ameliorating it can prevent people from sexually harassing others. A person more likely to engage in harassing behaviors is significantly less likely to do so in an environment that does not support harassing behaviors and/or has strong, clear, transparent consequences for these behaviors.

Chapter 3: Sexual Harassment in Academic Science, Engineering, and Medicine

• Male-dominated environment , with men in positions of power and authority.
• Organizational tolerance for sexually harassing behavior (e.g., failing to take complaints seriously, failing to sanction perpetrators, or failing to protect complainants from retaliation).
• Hierarchical and dependent relationships between faculty and their trainees (e.g., students, postdoctoral fellows, residents).
• Isolating environments (e.g., labs, field sites, and hospitals) in which faculty and trainees spend considerable time.
• Greater than 50 percent of women faculty and staff and 20–50 percent of women students encounter or experience sexually harassing conduct in academia.
• Women students in academic medicine experience more frequent gender harassment perpetrated by faculty/staff than women students in science and engineering.
• Women students/trainees encounter or experience sexual harassment perpetrated by faculty/staff and also by other students/trainees.
• Women faculty encounter or experience sexual harassment perpetrated by other faculty/staff and also by students/trainees.
• Women students, trainees, and faculty in academic medical centers experience sexual harassment by patients and patients’ families in addition to the harassment they experience from colleagues and those in leadership positions.

Chapter 4: Outcomes of Sexual Harassment

• When women experience sexual harassment in the workplace, the professional outcomes include declines in job satisfaction; withdrawal from their organization (i.e., distancing themselves from the work either physically or mentally without actually quitting, having thoughts or

intentions of leaving their job, and actually leaving their job); declines in organizational commitment (i.e., feeling disillusioned or angry with the organization); increases in job stress; and declines in productivity or performance.

• When students experience sexual harassment, the educational outcomes include declines in motivation to attend class, greater truancy, dropping classes, paying less attention in class, receiving lower grades, changing advisors, changing majors, and transferring to another educational institution, or dropping out.
• Gender harassment has adverse effects. Gender harassment that is severe or occurs frequently over a period of time can result in the same level of negative professional and psychological outcomes as isolated instances of sexual coercion. Gender harassment, often considered a “lesser,” more inconsequential form of sexual harassment, cannot be dismissed when present in an organization.
• The greater the frequency, intensity, and duration of sexually harassing behaviors, the more women report symptoms of depression, stress, and anxiety, and generally negative effects on psychological well-being.
• The more women are sexually harassed in an environment, the more they think about leaving, and end up leaving as a result of the sexual harassment.
• The more power a perpetrator has over the target, the greater the impacts and negative consequences experienced by the target.
• For women of color, preliminary research shows that when the sexual harassment occurs simultaneously with other types of harassment (i.e., racial harassment), the experiences can have more severe consequences for them.
• Sexual harassment has adverse effects that affect not only the targets of harassment but also bystanders, coworkers, workgroups, and entire organizations.
• Women cope with sexual harassment in a variety of ways, most often by ignoring or appeasing the harasser and seeking social support.
• The least common response for women is to formally report the sexually harassing experience. For many, this is due to an accurate perception that they may experience retaliation or other negative outcomes associated with their personal and professional lives.
• The dependence on advisors and mentors for career advancement.
• The system of meritocracy that does not account for the declines in productivity and morale as a result of sexual harassment.
• The “macho” culture in some fields.
• The informal communication network , in which rumors and accusations are spread within and across specialized programs and fields.
• The cumulative effect of sexual harassment is significant damage to research integrity and a costly loss of talent in academic science, engineering, and medicine. Women faculty in science, engineering, and medicine who experience sexual harassment report three common professional outcomes: stepping down from leadership opportunities to avoid the perpetrator, leaving their institution, and leaving their field altogether.

Chapter 5: Existing Legal and Policy Mechanisms for Addressing Sexual Harassment

• An overly legalistic approach to the problem of sexual harassment is likely to misjudge the true nature and scope of the problem. Sexual harassment law and policy development has focused narrowly on the sexualized and coercive forms of sexual harassment, not on the gender harassment type that research has identified as much more prevalent and at times equally harmful.
• Much of the sexual harassment that women experience and that damages women and their careers in science, engineering, and medicine does not meet the legal criteria of illegal discrimination under current law.
• Private entities, such as companies and private universities, are legally allowed to keep their internal policies and procedures—and their research on those policies and procedures—confidential, thereby limiting the research that can be done on effective policies for preventing and handling sexual harassment.
• Various legal policies, and the interpretation of such policies, enable academic institutions to maintain secrecy and/or confidentiality regarding outcomes of sexual harassment investigations, arbitration, and settlement agreements. Colleagues may also hesitate to warn one another about sexual harassment concerns in the hiring or promotion context out of fear of legal repercussions (i.e., being sued for defamation and/or discrimination). This lack of transparency in the adjudication process within organizations can cover up sexual harassment perpetrated by repeat or serial harassers. This creates additional barriers to researchers

and others studying harassment claims and outcomes, and is also a barrier to determining the effectiveness of policies and procedures.

• Title IX, Title VII, and case law reflect the inaccurate assumption that a target of sexual harassment will promptly report the harassment without worrying about retaliation. Effectively addressing sexual harassment through the law, institutional policies or procedures, or cultural change requires taking into account that targets of sexual harassment are unlikely to report harassment and often face retaliation for reporting (despite this being illegal).
• Fears of legal liability may prevent institutions from being willing to effectively evaluate training for its measurable impact on reducing harassment. Educating employees via sexual harassment training is commonly implemented as a central component of demonstrating to courts that institutions have “exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior.” However, research has not demonstrated that such training prevents sexual harassment. Thus, if institutions evaluated their training programs, they would likely find them to be ineffective, which, in turn, could raise fears within institutions of their risk for liability because they would then knowingly not be exercising reasonable care.
• Holding individuals and institutions responsible for sexual harassment and demonstrating that sexual harassment is a serious issue requires U.S. federal funding agencies to be aware when principal investigators, co-principal investigators, and grant personnel have violated sexual harassment policies. It is unclear whether and how federal agencies will take action beyond the requirements of Title IX and Title VII to ensure that federal grants, composed of taxpayers’ dollars, are not supporting research, academic institutions, or programs in which sexual harassment is ongoing and not being addressed. Federal science agencies usually indicate (e.g., in requests for proposals or other announcements) that they have a “no-tolerance” policy for sexual harassment. In general, federal agencies rely on the grantee institutions to investigate and follow through on Title IX violations. By not assessing and addressing the role of institutions and professional organizations in enabling individual sexual harassers, federal agencies may be perpetuating the problem of sexual harassment.
• To address the effect sexual harassment has on the integrity of research, parts of the federal government and several professional societies are beginning to focus more broadly on policies about research integrity and on codes of ethics rather than on the narrow definition of research misconduct. A powerful incentive for change may be missed if sexual harassment is not considered equally important as research misconduct, in terms of its effect on the integrity of research.

Chapter 6: Changing the Culture and Climate in Higher Education

• A systemwide change to the culture and climate in higher education is required to prevent and effectively address all three forms of sexual harassment. Despite significant attention in recent years, there is no evidence to suggest that current policies, procedures, and approaches have resulted in a significant reduction in sexual harassment. It is time to consider approaches that address the systems, cultures, and climates that enable sexual harassment to perpetuate.
• Strong and effective leaders at all levels in the organization are required to make the systemwide changes to climate and culture in higher education. The leadership of the organization—at every level—plays a significant role in establishing and maintaining an organization’s culture and norms. However, leaders in academic institutions rarely have leadership training to thoughtfully address culture and climate issues, and the leadership training that exists is often of poor quality.
• Evidence-based, effective intervention strategies are available for enhancing gender diversity in hiring practices.
• Focusing evaluation and reward structures on cooperation and collegiality rather than solely on individual-level teaching and research performance metrics could have a significant impact on improving the environment in academia.
• Evidence-based, effective intervention strategies are available for raising levels of interpersonal civility and respect in workgroups and teams.
• An organization that is committed to improving organizational climate must address issues of bias in academia. Training to reduce personal bias can cause larger-scale changes in departmental behaviors in an academic setting.
• Skills-based training that centers on bystander intervention promotes a culture of support, not one of silence. By calling out negative behaviors on the spot, all members of an academic community are helping to create a culture where abusive behavior is seen as an aberration, not as the norm.
• Reducing hierarchical power structures and diffusing power more broadly among faculty and trainees can reduce the risk of sexual ha

rassment. Departments and institutions could take the following approaches for diffusing power:

• Make use of egalitarian leadership styles that recognize that people at all levels of experience and expertise have important insights to offer.
• Adopt mentoring networks or committee-based advising that allows for a diversity of potential pathways for advice, funding, support, and informal reporting of harassment.
• Develop ways the research funding can be provided to the trainee rather than just the principal investigator.
• Take on the responsibility for preserving the potential work of the research team and trainees by redistributing the funding if a principal investigator cannot continue the work because he/she has created a climate that fosters sexual harassment and guaranteeing funding to trainees if the institution or a funder pulls funding from the principal investigator because of sexual harassment.
• Orienting students, trainees, faculty, and staff, at all levels, to the academic institution’s culture and its policies and procedures for handling sexual harassment can be an important piece of establishing a climate that demonstrates sexual harassment is not tolerated and targets will be supported.
• Institutions could build systems of response that empower targets by providing alternative and less formal means of accessing support services, recording information, and reporting incidents without fear of retaliation.
• Supporting student targets also includes helping them to manage their education and training over the long term.
• Confidentiality and nondisclosure agreements isolate sexual harassment targets by limiting their ability to speak with others about their experiences and can serve to shield perpetrators who have harassed people repeatedly.
• Key components of clear anti-harassment policies are that they are quickly and easily digested (i.e., using one-page flyers or infographics and not in legally dense language) and that they clearly state that people will be held accountable for violating the policy.
• A range of progressive/escalating disciplinary consequences (such as counseling, changes in work responsibilities, reductions in pay/benefits, and suspension or dismissal) that corresponds to the severity and frequency of the misconduct has the potential of correcting behavior before it escalates and without significantly disrupting an academic program.
• In an effort to change behavior and improve the climate, it may also be appropriate for institutions to undertake some rehabilitation-focused measures, even though these may not be sanctions per se.
• For the people in an institution to understand that the institution does not tolerate sexual harassment, it must show that it does investigate and then hold perpetrators accountable in a reasonable timeframe. Institutions can anonymize the basic information and provide regular reports that convey how many reports are being investigated and what the outcomes are from the investigation.
• An approach for improving transparency and demonstrating that the institution takes sexual harassment seriously is to encourage internal review of its policies, procedures, and interventions for addressing sexual harassment, and to have interactive dialogues with members of their campus community (especially expert researchers on these topics) around ways to improve the culture and climate and change behavior.
• Cater training to specific populations; in academia this would include students, postdoctoral fellows, staff, faculty, and those in leadership.
• Attend to the institutional motivation for training , which can impact the effectiveness of the training; for instance, compliance-based approaches have limited positive impact.
• Conduct training using live qualified trainers and offer trainees specific examples of inappropriate conduct. We note that a great deal of sexual harassment training today is offered via an online mini-course or the viewing of a short video.
• Describe standards of behavior clearly and accessibly (e.g., avoiding legal and technical terms).
• To the extent that the training literature provides broad guidelines for creating impactful training that can change climate and behavior, they include the following:
• Establish standards of behavior rather than solely seek to influence attitudes and beliefs. Clear communication of behavioral expectations, and teaching of behavioral skills, is essential.
• Conduct training in adherence to best standards , including appropriate pre-training needs assessment and evaluation of its effectiveness.
• Creating a climate that prevents sexual harassment requires measuring the climate in relation to sexual harassment, diversity, and respect, and assessing progress in reducing sexual harassment.
• Efforts to incentivize systemwide changes, such as Athena SWAN, 1 are crucial to motivating organizations and departments within organizations to make the necessary changes.
• Enacting new codes of conduct and new rules related specifically to conference attendance.
• Including sexual harassment in codes of ethics and investigating reports of sexual harassment. (This is a new responsibility for professional societies, and these organizations are considering how to take into consideration the law, home institutions, due process, and careful reporting when dealing with reports of sexual harassment.)
• Requiring members to acknowledge, in writing, the professional society’s rules and codes of conduct relating to sexual harassment during conference registration and during membership sign-up and renewal.
• Supporting and designing programs that prevent harassment and provide skills to intervene when someone is being harassed.
• Strengthening statements on sexual harassment, bullying, and discrimination in professional societies’ codes of conduct, with a few defining it as research misconduct.
• Factoring in harassment-related professional misconduct into scientific award decisions.
• Professional societies have the potential to be powerful drivers of change through their capacity to help educate, train, codify, and reinforce cultural expectations for their respective scientific, engineering, and medical communities. Some professional societies have taken action to prevent and respond to sexual harassment among their membership. Although each professional society has taken a slightly different approach to addressing sexual harassment, there are some shared approaches, including the following:

___________________

1 Athena SWAN (Scientific Women’s Academic Network). See https://www.ecu.ac.uk/equalitycharters/athena-swan/ .

• There are many promising approaches to changing the culture and climate in academia; however, further research assessing the effects and values of the following approaches is needed to identify best practices:
• Policies, procedures, trainings, and interventions, specifically how they prevent and stop sexually harassing behavior, alter perception of organizational tolerance for sexually harassing behavior, and reduce the negative consequences from reporting the incidents. This includes informal and formal reporting mechanisms, bystander intervention training, academic leadership training, sexual harassment training, interventions to improve civility, mandatory reporting requirements, and approaches to supporting and improving communication with the target.
• Mechanisms for target-led resolution options and mechanisms by which the target has a role in deciding what happens to the perpetrator, including restorative justice practices.
• Mechanisms for protecting targets from retaliation.
• Rehabilitation-focused measures for disciplining perpetrators.
• Incentive systems for encouraging leaders in higher education to address the issues of sexual harassment on campus.

RECOMMENDATIONS

RECOMMENDATION 1: Create diverse, inclusive, and respectful environments.

• Academic institutions and their leaders should take explicit steps to achieve greater gender and racial equity in hiring and promotions, and thus improve the representation of women at every level.
• Academic institutions and their leaders should take steps to foster greater cooperation, respectful work behavior, and professionalism at the faculty, staff, and student/trainee levels, and should evaluate faculty and staff on these criteria in hiring and promotion.
• Academic institutions should combine anti-harassment efforts with civility-promotion programs.
• Academic institutions should cater their training to specific populations (in academia these should include students/trainees, staff, faculty, and those in leadership) and should follow best practices in designing training programs. Training should be viewed as the means of providing the skills needed by all members of the academic community, each of whom has a role to play in building a positive organizational climate focused on safety and respect, and not simply as a method of ensuring compliance with laws.
• Academic institutions should utilize training approaches that develop skills among participants to interrupt and intervene when inappropriate behavior occurs. These training programs should be evaluated to deter

mine whether they are effective and what aspects of the training are most important to changing culture.

• Anti–sexual harassment training programs should focus on changing behavior, not on changing beliefs. Programs should focus on clearly communicating behavioral expectations, specifying consequences for failing to meet these expectations, and identifying the mechanisms to be utilized when these expectations are not met. Training programs should not be based on the avoidance of legal liability.

RECOMMENDATION 2: Address the most common form of sexual harassment: gender harassment.

Leaders in academic institutions and research and training sites should pay increased attention to and enact policies that cover gender harassment as a means of addressing the most common form of sexual harassment and of preventing other types of sexually harassing behavior.

RECOMMENDATION 3: Move beyond legal compliance to address culture and climate.

Academic institutions, research and training sites, and federal agencies should move beyond interventions or policies that represent basic legal compliance and that rely solely on formal reports made by targets. Sexual harassment needs to be addressed as a significant culture and climate issue that requires institutional leaders to engage with and listen to students and other campus community members.

RECOMMENDATION 4: Improve transparency and accountability.

• Academic institutions need to develop—and readily share—clear, accessible, and consistent policies on sexual harassment and standards of behavior. They should include a range of clearly stated, appropriate, and escalating disciplinary consequences for perpetrators found to have violated sexual harassment policy and/or law. The disciplinary actions taken should correspond to the severity and frequency of the harassment. The disciplinary actions should not be something that is often considered a benefit for faculty, such as a reduction in teaching load or time away from campus service responsibilities. Decisions regarding disciplinary actions, if indicated or required, should be made in a fair and timely way following an investigative process that is fair to all sides. 2
• Academic institutions should be as transparent as possible about how they are handling reports of sexual harassment. This requires balancing issues of confidentiality with issues of transparency. Annual reports,

2 Further detail on processes and guidance for how to fairly and appropriately investigate and adjudicate these issues are not provided because they are complex issues that were beyond the scope of this study.

that provide information on (1) how many and what type of policy violations have been reported (both informally and formally), (2) how many reports are currently under investigation, and (3) how many have been adjudicated, along with general descriptions of any disciplinary actions taken, should be shared with the entire academic community: students, trainees, faculty, administrators, staff, alumni, and funders. At the very least, the results of the investigation and any disciplinary action should be shared with the target(s) and/or the person(s) who reported the behavior.

• Academic institutions should be accountable for the climate within their organization. In particular, they should utilize climate surveys to further investigate and address systemic sexual harassment, particularly when surveys indicate specific schools or facilities have high rates of harassment or chronically fail to reduce rates of sexual harassment.
• Academic institutions should consider sexual harassment equally important as research misconduct in terms of its effect on the integrity of research. They should increase collaboration among offices that oversee the integrity of research (i.e., those that cover ethics, research misconduct, diversity, and harassment issues); centralize resources, information, and expertise; provide more resources for handling complaints and working with targets; and implement sanctions on researchers found guilty of sexual harassment.

RECOMMENDATION 5: Diffuse the hierarchical and dependent relationship between trainees and faculty.

Academic institutions should consider power-diffusion mechanisms (i.e., mentoring networks or committee-based advising and departmental funding rather than funding only from a principal investigator) to reduce the risk of sexual harassment.

RECOMMENDATION 6: Provide support for the target.

Academic institutions should convey that reporting sexual harassment is an honorable and courageous action. Regardless of a target filing a formal report, academic institutions should provide means of accessing support services (social services, health care, legal, career/professional). They should provide alternative and less formal means of recording information about the experience and reporting the experience if the target is not comfortable filing a formal report. Academic institutions should develop approaches to prevent the target from experiencing or fearing retaliation in academic settings.

RECOMMENDATION 7: Strive for strong and diverse leadership.

• College and university presidents, provosts, deans, department chairs, and program directors must make the reduction and prevention of sexual

harassment an explicit goal of their tenure. They should publicly state that the reduction and prevention of sexual harassment will be among their highest priorities, and they should engage students, faculty, and staff (and, where appropriate, the local community) in their efforts.

• Academic institutions should support and facilitate leaders at every level (university, school/college, department, lab) in developing skills in leadership, conflict resolution, mediation, negotiation, and de-escalation, and should ensure a clear understanding of policies and procedures for handling sexual harassment issues. Additionally, these skills development programs should be customized to each level of leadership.
• Leadership training programs for those in academia should include training on how to recognize and handle sexual harassment issues, and how to take explicit steps to create a culture and climate to reduce and prevent sexual harassment—and not just protect the institution against liability.

RECOMMENDATION 8: Measure progress.

Academic institutions should work with researchers to evaluate and assess their efforts to create a more diverse, inclusive, and respectful environment, and to create effective policies, procedures, and training programs. They should not rely on formal reports by targets for an understanding of sexual harassment on their campus.

• When organizations study sexual harassment, they should follow the valid methodologies established by social science research on sexual harassment and should consult subject-matter experts. Surveys that attempt to ascertain the prevalence and types of harassment experienced by individuals should adopt the following practices: ensure confidentiality, use validated behavioral instruments such as the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire, and avoid specifically using the term “sexual harassment” in any survey or questionnaire.
• Academic institutions should also conduct more wide-ranging assessments using measures in addition to campus climate surveys, for example, ethnography, focus groups, and exit interviews. These methods are especially important in smaller organizational units where surveys, which require more participants to yield meaningful data, might not be useful.
• Organizations studying sexual harassment in their environments should take into consideration the particular experiences of people of color and sexual- and gender-minority people, and they should utilize methods that allow them to disaggregate their data by race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and gender identity to reveal the different experiences across populations.
• The results of climate surveys should be shared publicly to encourage transparency and accountability and to demonstrate to the campus community that the institution takes the issue seriously. One option would be for academic institutions to collaborate in developing a central repository for reporting their climate data, which could also improve the ability for research to be conducted on the effectiveness of institutional approaches.
• Federal agencies and foundations should commit resources to develop a tool similar to ARC3, the Administrator-Researcher Campus Climate Collaborative, to understand and track the climate for faculty, staff, and postdoctoral fellows.

RECOMMENDATION 9: Incentivize change.

• Academic institutions should work to apply for awards from the emerging STEM Equity Achievement (SEA Change) program. 3 Federal agencies and private foundations should encourage and support academic institutions working to achieve SEA Change awards.
• Accreditation bodies should consider efforts to create diverse, inclusive, and respectful environments when evaluating institutions or departments.
• Federal agencies should incentivize efforts to reduce sexual harassment in academia by requiring evaluations of the research environment, funding research and evaluation of training for students and faculty (including bystander intervention), supporting the development and evaluation of leadership training for faculty, and funding research on effective policies and procedures.

RECOMMENDATION 10: Encourage involvement of professional societies and other organizations.

• Professional societies should accelerate their efforts to be viewed as organizations that are helping to create culture changes that reduce or prevent the occurrence of sexual harassment. They should provide support and guidance for members who have been targets of sexual harassment. They should use their influence to address sexual harassment in the scientific, medical, and engineering communities they represent and promote a professional culture of civility and respect. The efforts of the American Geophysical Union are especially exemplary and should be considered as a model for other professional societies to follow.
• Other organizations that facilitate the research and training of people in science, engineering, and medicine, such as collaborative field sites (i.e., national labs and observatories), should establish standards of behavior

3 See https://www.aaas.org/news/sea-change-program-aims-transform-diversity-efforts-stem .

and set policies, procedures, and practices similar to those recommended for academic institutions and following the examples of professional societies. They should hold people accountable for their behaviors while at their facility regardless of the person’s institutional affiliation (just as some professional societies are doing).

RECOMMENDATION 11: Initiate legislative action.

State legislatures and Congress should consider new and additional legislation with the following goals:

• Better protecting sexual harassment claimants from retaliation.
• Prohibiting confidentiality in settlement agreements that currently enable harassers to move to another institution and conceal past adjudications.
• Banning mandatory arbitration clauses for discrimination claims.
• Allowing lawsuits to be filed against alleged harassers directly (instead of or in addition to their academic employers).
• Requiring institutions receiving federal funds to publicly disclose results from campus climate surveys and/or the number of sexual harassment reports made to campuses.
• Requesting the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health devote research funds to doing a follow-up analysis on the topic of sexual harassment in science, engineering, and medicine in 3 to 5 years to determine (1) whether research has shown that the prevalence of sexual harassment has decreased, (2) whether progress has been made on implementing these recommendations, and (3) where to focus future efforts.

RECOMMENDATION 12: Address the failures to meaningfully enforce Title VII’s prohibition on sex discrimination.

• Judges, academic institutions (including faculty, staff, and leaders in academia), and administrative agencies should rely on scientific evidence about the behavior of targets and perpetrators of sexual harassment when assessing both institutional compliance with the law and the merits of individual claims.
• Federal judges should take into account demonstrated effectiveness of anti-harassment policies and practices such as trainings, and not just their existence , for use of an affirmative defense against a sexual harassment claim under Title VII.

RECOMMENDATION 13: Increase federal agency action and collaboration.

Federal agencies should do the following:

• Increase support for research and evaluation of the effectiveness of policies, procedures, and training on sexual harassment.
• Attend to sexual harassment with at least the same level of attention and resources as devoted to research misconduct. They should increase collaboration among offices that oversee the integrity of research (i.e., those that cover ethics, research misconduct, diversity, and harassment issues); centralize resources, information, and expertise; provide more resources for handling complaints and working with targets; and implement sanctions on researchers found guilty of sexual harassment.
• Require institutions to report to federal agencies when individuals on grants have been found to have violated sexual harassment policies or have been put on administrative leave related to sexual harassment, as the National Science Foundation has proposed doing. Agencies should also hold accountable the perpetrator and the institution by using a range of disciplinary actions that limit the negative effects on other grant personnel who were either the target of the harassing behavior or innocent bystanders.
• Reward and incentivize colleges and universities for implementing policies, programs, and strategies that research shows are most likely to and are succeeding in reducing and preventing sexual harassment.

RECOMMENDATION 14: Conduct necessary research.

Funders should support the following research:

• The sexual harassment experiences of women in underrepresented and/or vulnerable groups, including women of color, disabled women, immigrant women, sexual- and gender-minority women, postdoctoral trainees, and others.
• Policies, procedures, trainings, and interventions, specifically their ability to prevent and stop sexually harassing behavior, to alter perception of organizational tolerance for sexually harassing behavior, and to reduce the negative consequences from reporting the incidents. This should include research on informal and formal reporting mechanisms, bystander intervention training, academic leadership training, sexual harassment and diversity training, interventions to improve civility, mandatory reporting requirements, and approaches to supporting and improving communication with the target.
• Approaches for mitigating the negative impacts and outcomes that targets experience.
• The prevalence and nature of sexual harassment within specific fields in

science, engineering, and medicine and that follows good practices for sexual harassment surveys.

• The prevalence and nature of sexual harassment perpetrated by students on faculty.
• The amount of sexual harassment that serial harassers are responsible for.
• The prevalence and effect of ambient harassment in the academic setting.
• The connections between consensual relationships and sexual harassment.
• Psychological characteristics that increase the risk of perpetrating different forms of sexually harassing behaviors.

RECOMMENDATION 15: Make the entire academic community responsible for reducing and preventing sexual harassment.

All members of our nation’s college campuses—students, trainees, faculty, staff, and administrators—as well as members of research and training sites should assume responsibility for promoting civil and respectful education, training, and work environments, and stepping up and confronting those whose behaviors and actions create sexually harassing environments.

This page intentionally left blank.

Over the last few decades, research, activity, and funding has been devoted to improving the recruitment, retention, and advancement of women in the fields of science, engineering, and medicine. In recent years the diversity of those participating in these fields, particularly the participation of women, has improved and there are significantly more women entering careers and studying science, engineering, and medicine than ever before. However, as women increasingly enter these fields they face biases and barriers and it is not surprising that sexual harassment is one of these barriers.

Over thirty years the incidence of sexual harassment in different industries has held steady, yet now more women are in the workforce and in academia, and in the fields of science, engineering, and medicine (as students and faculty) and so more women are experiencing sexual harassment as they work and learn. Over the last several years, revelations of the sexual harassment experienced by women in the workplace and in academic settings have raised urgent questions about the specific impact of this discriminatory behavior on women and the extent to which it is limiting their careers.

Sexual Harassment of Women explores the influence of sexual harassment in academia on the career advancement of women in the scientific, technical, and medical workforce. This report reviews the research on the extent to which women in the fields of science, engineering, and medicine are victimized by sexual harassment and examines the existing information on the extent to which sexual harassment in academia negatively impacts the recruitment, retention, and advancement of women pursuing scientific, engineering, technical, and medical careers. It also identifies and analyzes the policies, strategies and practices that have been the most successful in preventing and addressing sexual harassment in these settings.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

Equal Rights Advocates

Search Search

Know Your Rights at School

Sexual Assault & Sexual Harassment

How to use this guide, definitions & examples, what are the laws, what are my rights, what can i do, what could happen, tools & resources.

• College/higher education: Go to the Student Survivor Toolkit 
• Go to our K-5 guide

For information on your rights regarding online sexual harassment that happens during remote virtual learning, see our Online Harassment & Cyberbullying guide.

• If you would like to apply for free legal help or advice about a  California school-related issue , please  fill out this form  to request an appointment with one of ERA’s trained legal counselors ( ENOUGH advocates ). All services provided are  completely free and confidential.

Content warning: This guide contains information and examples of sexual assault and sexual harassment that may be triggering or overwhelming for you, especially if you are a survivor of sexual violence. Please be aware of your emotional and mental needs while reading. You may want to take breaks, skip over or skim some sections, or ask a trusted loved one to read it for you and take notes.

How to use this guide : The purpose of this Know Your Rights Guide is to help you understand your rights and options if you have experienced sexual assault or sexual harassment at a school or university. This guide is not official legal advice. Laws frequently change and can be interpreted in different ways, so we cannot guarantee that all of the information in this Guide is accurate as it applies to your specific situation.

I was glad to finally have a partner in fighting for what I knew was right. Neither of us wanted to see this happen to anyone else. Júlia Sanchez, ERA student client

Read Júlia & Amelia’s Story

There are different forms of sexual assault and sexual harassment. You can be assaulted or harassed by a fellow student, a teacher, professor, coach, staff or faculty member, or (if you work at the school) by a coworker.

Sexual Assault is a physical invasion of your body. It can sometimes result in bodily harm or injury, as well as psychological and emotional trauma. The definition of sexual assault includes rape, as well as other acts that invade or hurt your body. Other examples of sexual assault include inappropriate touching, groping, attempted rape, forcing you to perform a sexual act, or penetrating any part of your body with a part of their body, or with an object.  If what happened included unwelcome touching of your body, the situation may have involved sexual assault.

Sexual Harassment ranges from unwanted touching, gesturing, and inappropriate jokes, to someone promising you a good grade or a promotion in exchange for sexual favors or requiring sexual favors in order to give you something you deserve or want in a school or work setting. Sexual harassment does not always have to be “sexual.” It can also look or feel like teasing, intimidating or offensive comments based on stereotypes (e.g., about how certain people “are” or should act), or bullying someone based on their sex, gender identity (man, woman, trans, intersex, nonbinary, two-spirit) or sexual orientation (queer, bisexual, lesbian, gay, asexual, pansexual, etc.).  There is no requirement that the sexually harassing person or persons derive any sexual pleasure from their acts or that they are sexually attracted to their victims.

In short, sexual harassment is harassment that is sexual, sex-based, or gender-based in the nature of the harassment itself, regardless of the orientation, gender-identity, sexual interests or pleasure of the harasser.

Examples of sexual harassment include but are not limited to:

• unwanted repeated requests for sexual favors or dates from a peer
• requests for sexual favors or dates from a teacher to a student in a k-12 setting
• inappropriate or lewd comments said or repeated to you or around you
• inappropriate or lewd comments about someone’s body or appearance
• saying bad things about someone (or about a group of people) based on gender identity or sexuality
• gender-based or sexuality-based slurs (swear words)
•  jokes about sex, or making fun of people generally based on their gender identity or sexuality (i.e. “all women…” or “bisexual people are…”)
• Note: It can still count as sexual harassment even if the behavior or comment is not aimed at you specifically. For example, if you are a trans student who hears a group of other students making offensive jokes or insults about trans people in general, that could still be considered harassment even if they were not directing those comments to you as an individual.
• unwanted emails, texts, messages, videos, or photos of a sexual nature
• gossip about someone’s personal relationships or sex life
• unwanted touching of any body part, clothing, face, or hair
• staring, leering, or making gestures of a sexual nature
• blocking someone’s way or their movement, especially in a physically threatening or intimidating way
• inappropriate touching, massaging, kissing, or hugging
•  flashing or mooning
• Note: pornographic pictures of anybody under the age of 18 is illegal child pornography, even if the person who took or shared the pictures is also under the age of 18.  If you are reporting vulgar pictures or pornography, the age of the subject of the pictures or videos can be an important fact to tell the responsible school party you are reporting to.

Important things to remember

• Legally, for something to be considered sexual assault or harassment, what matters is what the victim/survivor experienced. It does not matter if the person who did the assaulting or harassing thinks it was OK, harmless, not sexual, or “welcomed” (they thought you liked it, wanted it, or didn’t have a problem with it). It counts as sexual assault or harassment if the behavior made you feel unsafe or uncomfortable, was unwanted, or violated your body.
• It counts as sexual harassment even if you did not immediately say “stop,” or “no,” or something else to let the person know that what they were doing or saying was unwanted or inappropriate. For example, you might laugh at a joke, or accept a hug, because you’re caught off guard in the moment, or because you’re worried the person will react badly if you don’t go along. Or, in the case of sexual assault, you may have been too drunk or inebriated to consent. This is not your fault.  Nobody deserves to be harmed by another person when incapacitated, no matter what.
• You can still experience sexual assault event if you previously consented to sexual activity with that person, or if you used to date them or sleep with them. Saying “yes” once or even multiple times does not mean that you said “yes” to other sexual acts. Consent must be given (and asked for) every time.
• Most importantly: It is never the victim’s or survivor’s fault . Do not let anyone blame or shame you.

Sexual harassment and sexual assault are considered versions of unlawful gender discrimination at school. Both are illegal across the country.

1.  Sexual assault and sexual harassment are illegal at U.S. schools that receive federal funding (Title IX)

Title IX (“Title 9”) of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 makes discrimination based on gender illegal at schools, colleges, and school programs (including school-affiliated sports teams, programs, and clubs) and in any education program that receives federal funds (i.e., prison diploma programs, construction trade training programs). Sexual assault and sexual harassment are forms of gender discrimination under this law.

If you are sexually assaulted or sexually harassed at school – or if the harassment or assault has a negative impact on your equal access to school (for example, if you have a class with the person who assaulted you at a party off campus, or if the fear and anxiety of running into that person even if you don’t have a class with them is interfering with your equal ability to move around your campus as a student would) – you can report the incident (called “making a Title IX complaint”) to your school and request that they take immediate, reasonable, action to help you feel safer while they investigate your Title IX complaint.

• The Title IX process will take place at your school only. It is not connected to the criminal justice system, so it will not involve off-campus police, jail, or a trial court.  While you can file a criminal complaint and a Title IX complaint at the same time if you want to, these are separate processes investigated by different authorities.  Title IX is a type of student misconduct complaint.  A school must begin, continue, or complete their internal Title IX investigation regardless of whether a separate police investigation is undertaken or ongoing.
• Legally, your school must share (or make available) its policies on sexual harassment and sexual assault with every student, teacher, and staff member. (Those policies may be under a “gender discrimination” section in the student handbook, HR manual, or school board policies.) Your school must also provide students with information about how to report sexual violence or harassment, known as a “grievance procedure.” This policy should tell you what happens after you report, including how the investigation will go, and what “interim measures” are available from the school to help you feel safe during the investigation.
• Note about Title IX at private schools : If the school receives any federal funding, they must comply with Title IX.  This includes most but not all private and religious schools. If you’re not sure whether your school receives any federal funding our how to find out, contact an ERA team member through our ENOUGH program .

2.  If you report sexual assault or harassment, your school cannot ignore you or blame you . The law requires all federally funded schools and colleges to respond to reports of sexual assault or sexual harassment in a reasonably quick and appropriate way. This means once you tell your school about sexual harassment or sexual assault, they should start an investigation without much of a delay (it may take a few days, but should not take longer, unless you report over a school closure or holiday period, in which case it should not take longer than a couple weeks after school resumes). If the results of the investigation show that the sexual assault or sexual harassment more likely than not occurred, your school must then take immediate steps to stop the harassment or assault if it is ongoing, or to prevent it from happening again.

Sometimes schools don’t follow the law. Schools can break the law by mistreating or ignoring those who report sexual assault or sexual harassment. For example:

• The investigation could be delayed, or could drag on for too long
• The school could ignore or dismiss you
• They could try to get you to drop the complaint
• They could lash out against you for reporting, or make you feel as if it was your fault
• They could tell you they’re not required to investigate your complaint when in fact they might be, based on what you have learned about your rights here.

If any of these things happened to you, if your school investigated and did nothing to help make you feel safer, or if your school made things even worse for you when you reported to them what happened to you (this is a type of bad response known as “institutional betrayal”) you could take legal action . If you’d like to apply to speak to a legal advocate for free about your options for taking action, fill out this form .

Schools must also do something to address the negative results of the sexual assault or sexual harassment, which could mean providing counseling for you, or giving you academic support, such as allowing you to re-take a test or a class if your grades suffered as a result of the assault or harassment.

3.  Retaliation is illegal.

It’s illegal for anyone to retaliate against (punish or intimidate) you for reporting or speaking out against sexual harassment or sexual assault that happened to you or someone else, or for participating in an investigation. Examples of retaliation for reporting include:

• if your school tries to limit where you, the victim of harassment or assault, can go. (For example, a Mutual No-Contact Order that says you must leave a place if you see your assailant there.)
• if you, the victim of harassment or assault, are asked to switch classes or move dorms
• if you’re not allowed to go to certain places at certain times
• if a school official or investigator makes you feel ashamed, or makes you feel like if was your fault that you were harassed or assaulted
• if someone threatens you, tries to make you drop the complaint/investigation, intimidates you, or coerces you (promises you something in exchange for dropping the complaint/investigation)
• if you work at the school or school program, and you’re fired or demoted; you receive a pay cut or a reduction of hours or benefits; you’re assigned a different shift, location, or position; you receive new or different duties; or you’re asked to take time off.

 If you were retaliated against and would like to apply to speak with a legal advocate for free about your options, fill out this form .

For me, queer justice is not about being punitive. It’s about being transformative. It’s about creating space for healing and accountability. Kel O'Hara, ERA attorney

Read Kel’s Story

 You have the right to:

1.  Feel safe at school after sexual assault or sexual harassment. Your school is required by law to provide a safe learning environment that is not “hostile” to you, which includes creating an environment that’s free from violence, harassment, and intimidation.

• If you reported sexual assault or harassment and your school did not take it seriously , or has not done anything to make you feel safer, or made things worse for you at school, you could consider contacting one of our ENOUGH legal advocates .

2.  Be told about your school’s policies on sexual assault and harassment — including how to report — in a way that you understand. The policy should tell you who to report to, and give you information about what could happen and what to expect of the school process after you report.

3.  Talk to anyone you want about sexual assault or sexual harassment that happened to you. You also have the right to speak out against sexual assault or sexual harassment at your school, or to speak out against a school policy or practice that is harmful to survivors of sexual assault or harassment.

4.  Report the sexual assault or harassment to a school official , including a professor, teacher, coach or faculty member. But be aware that if you tell a teacher, professor, coach, or school official about sexual assault or harassment, they are required , under other laws, to report it to a higher-up person at your school. If you do choose to report, we recommend reporting in writing (email or letter) and making copies for yourself. (For more on how to report sexual assault or harassment in writing, see the What Can I Do? section below.)

5.  Report it without telling the assailant or harasser in advance. You do NOT have to tell the person who sexually assaulted or harassed you that you are going to report it to your school or that you are going to file a Title IX complaint. You do not even have to tell them after you report them or file the complaint, but they will find out if the school opens an investigation, so be prepared.  The school has a legal obligation to let them know that a complaint was made against them and to collect their statement and/or answers to any questions the school may have in its investigation.

6.  Warn the assailant that you are considering filing a Title IX complaint.   It is OK to “threaten” reporting and then decide not to report if you are satisfied that the assailant’s harassing has stopped or if you change your mind about reporting.  You are not obliged to report just because you told your peers that you might report. But again remember, many school employees are “mandated reporters,” so they will be required to report once aware of what happened.

7.  Have your Title IX complaint taken seriously and investigated by your school.  Once your school is aware of the sexual assault or sexual harassment, the law requires them to (1) take quick action to stop the harassment or assault if it is ongoing, and (2) provide protection for you if necessary. Protection could include issuing a “no-contact order”— which is like the school-version of an unofficial temporary restraining order— against the person who sexually assaulted or harassed you.

• Note: A no-contact-order issued by a school is not a legal document, and it is not enforceable by a court of law or by police who are not campus police.But it is an official school document and is enforceable by the school and/or campus police under the school’s misconduct policies.
• Be aware : Investigations usually include the investigator interviewing the person who sexually assaulted or harassed you, and they will know that you are the one who reported them. If you think knowing this will make the person dangerous, be sure to tell your school and also make clear that you expect the school to take immediate actions to help you feel safe. The investigation will also include interviewing you in detail about the incident(s), and could involve interviews with potential witnesses. Usually, but not always, a school asks for a list of potential witness from both the student who complained (the “complainant”) and the student accused of the harassment or assault (the “respondent”).  The school may also interview individuals not on either student’s witness list whom the school believes might be important to talk to.

8.  If your school does any of the following after you report, you have the right to seek legal action against the school:

• if they ignore you
• if they don’t investigate
• if they don’t offer you protection when you need it
• if they treat you badly after you report, for example making you feel like it was your fault, like you are lying, or that you are overreacting
• if the school has created a dangerous situation for you or other students by inviting or keeping a serial assailant on campus

If your school did any of these things to you, we may be able to help. Learn more about our Learn more about our ENOUGH program, which provides free, confidential legal advice.

9.  Participate in a Title IX investigation or be a witness for someone else. Whether it’s an investigation into something that happened to you, or to someone else, you have a right to participate without barriers or retaliation — even if the claims end up being dismissed, or the investigation determines that sexual assault or harassment didn’t occur.  

10.  To make a police report or seek other civil remedies . You have the right to report conduct that is a crime (such as harassment or assault) to law enforcement if you want to. You are not required to do so in order to file a Title IX complaint. You can use the civil (non criminal) court system to obtain a restraining order or sue your assailant for money. Your school cannot attempt to stop you from asserting any of these legal rights, or to force you to do so.  

11.  To do nothing. It is a perfectly acceptable choice to do nothing about the assault or harassment you experienced. It is 100% your decision whether or not to come forward about your experiences.

If your rights were violated and you’d like to speak to a legal advocate about your options for taking action, apply for free legal help using this form.

If you or someone you know was sexually assaulted or sexually harassed, here are some things you could do. Remember: It is normal to be afraid or worried about reporting sexual assault or sexual harassment. Do what is right for you. These are just examples of some options you have.

1. Talk to an ENOUGH legal advocate. We provide free, confidential legal advice and help. Fill out our online application form  to request a phone appointment with an ENOUGH advocate , attorneys who are here for you and can give you free legal information, tell you what your rights and options are, and potentially provide legal representation.

• Note: At this time, we are only able to help with incidents that occurred at California colleges (or other CA higher education institutions).

2. Look at your school’s policies on sexual misconduct and the Title IX complaint process . Most schools have a Student Handbook or Code of Conduct.  You may have received it when you started at the school, and it may be available on your school’s website. Look through these policies to figure out what options you have. The policy should include information about how to report the misconduct (sexual assault or harassment).  If it looks like your school does not have policies at all, or if you think their policies do not meet the requirement of Title IX, please contact us . Not having policies, or having legally inadequate policies, is a violation of Title IX.  If you are looking into the policies of a K-12 school, our checklist might help you evaluate your schools policies and the accessibility of those policies.

3.  Write everything down. If you are thinking of filing a Title IX complaint, you should write down what happened as soon as you can so you don’t forget any details. This step may be very difficult, but it is recommended so you can protect yourself during an investigation and in the months that follow the harassment or assault.

Note : It is very normal for a person who has experienced such harm, especially sexual violence, to have trouble remembering things in order, to sometimes remember only some parts of what happened, etc.  This is a protective response the brain has to to help protect a person who has experienced trauma.  If you write things down, as much and as soon as you can, this will help you have the information you need as you move forward, even if your mental and emotional needs make remembering the exact chronology of events difficult as time goes.

• Save any emails, texts, letters, or messages from the person who assaulted or harassed you, or any messages or emails you sent to someone else about the incident.
• Write down what happened to you , including dates and times, where it occurred, what exactly was done and said, and the names of any potential witnesses from during, before, or after the incident. Include as much detail as possible. If you’re comfortable doing so, ask any witnesses to write down what they saw or heard.
• Keep notes of any meetings you have with school officials . Record the time, date, and places of the meetings, who was there, and what was said.
• Keep copies of all documents, emails, or letters regarding your report, the investigation, the Title IX complaint , and any other related files, including copies of your responses.

If you think your school retaliated against (punished or intimidated) you for reporting, keep detailed notes of every action that happened, including who, when, where, and any witnesses to the retaliatory actions or threats.

4.  Report the sexual assault or harassment to a school official . Try to find contact information for your school’s Title IX Coordinator. If you can’t find it, ask a trusted teacher, your RA, academic adviser, or guidance counselor. But remember: If you tell a teacher, professor, advisor, or counselor about sexual assault or sexual harassment occurring, they’re required by law to report it to a school official.

• If you do want to officially report and have the school investigate, we recommend submitting your report in writing , whether it’s an email or letter that you give to the Title IX coordinator in-person. Be sure to keep copies for yourself. This report should include detail of what happened, including the date and time, place, and who was involved.
• Dear [name of Title IX coordinator or school official], I’m writing to confirm that we met/talked on the phone today, 2024, to discuss the fact that I was sexually assaulted/ sexually harassed by [name] on 2024. You told me that you would [what they said they would do] by 2024. Thank you for taking the time to meet with me about this issue.  Please let me know if you have any further questions for me and what you expect the timeline of your investigation to be. [Your name]”

5.  If you reported sexual assault or harassment to your school and you were ignored or mistreated, you could seek legal action. If your school ignored you, tried to get you to “drop it,” did not tell you about your right to file a Title IX complaint, made you feel bad for reporting, did not investigate, took too long to investigate, or tried to blame you for the assault or harassment, they broke the law.

Download "Power of IX Checklist: K-12" PDF

The process at every school is different, and can even be different at campuses within the same university system, but most follow the same basic procedure:  

1.  Initial interview: Once you report the sexual assault or sexual harassment (known as “making a Title IX complaint”) the Title IX Coordinator, administrator, or school employee who is assigned and trained to handle Title IX investigations, should reach out to conduct an initial interview with you (as the victim of sexual assault or harassment, or as the person reporting something you witnessed or are worried about) to gain more information. This interview will form the basis of the complaint, so it is important to be as clear as you can, to include any detail you can remember, and to let the investigator know when you are unsure about something. It’s OK if you don’t know everything.

• At this point, a school official or the Title IX Coordinator should provide you with information about the investigation process, your rights, your options to request interim measures to help you feel safe and supported at school, and your right to have an advisor of your choice assist you. Other services that may be available to you that the school should tell you about include counseling and academic services. All of this information should be given to you at the initial meeting.  

2.  Investigator interviews : After the initial interview, an investigator may be assigned to your case. The other party (the person who harmed or harassed you or someone else) will be notified and interviewed. The investigator will then interview any witnesses and receive any evidence provided. If you have any questions about how the investigator will contact the person you are complaining about, it is OK to ask the investigator to explain it to you and tell the investigator about any concerns you might have.

3.  Follow-up questions : The investigator might follow up with you if more questions come up during their investigation.

4.  Evidence review (COLLEGE ONLY): Once the investigator completes the process of interviewing everyone involved, they will most likely send summaries of the witness statements and any evidence to both parties for the evidence review. This is your opportunity to correct anything misstated, to rebut (oppose) any false statements by the other party or their witnesses, or to comment on the relevance of evidence or why the investigator should not consider certain evidence.

5.  Issuing a determination : Once the evidence review period is complete, the investigator (or a different school official) will make a determination as to whether or not the violation took place. This is based on a “preponderance of the evidence,” meaning that it is more likely true than not true that it occurred. If, by this standard, the school finds that the sexual assault or harassment occurred, it may recommend a sanction (a consequence for the person responsible).

6.  Possible hearing (COLLEGE ONLY) : Depending on what state you are in, whether your allegations include sexual violence, and whether the other party is a student or an employee, there may be a hearing after the determination is made. You may or may not have a right to appear at this hearing, and the other party may or may not have the opportunity to ask you questions about your allegations.

7.  Option to appeal:

• College : Once a decision has been made about what happened and what disciplinary action should be taken, both parties typically have the right to appeal the decision to the Chancellor or some other officer at the school. Appeals are typically made because the disciplinary action taken by the school was not appropriate (either too big or too small), the evidence does not support the finding that was made, there was some procedural error in the investigation or hearing, and/or there is new evidence that should be considered which could change the outcome. The case might be sent back to the investigator to fix any errors that occurred, the decision could be overturned and replaced with a new decision, or the decision could be affirmed and kept in place.
• K-12 : The structure of the appeal process differs by state. If you don’t like the outcome of the investigation, you should see if your school district has an appeal process, or you could appeal to a state entity, such as your state’s Department of Education.

Have questions or need legal help? Apply to speak with an ENOUGH advocate for free legal help, information, or advice. Fill out this form to get started.

• Apply for free legal advice or counseling from one of our legal advocates (California higher education only)
• Stop Sexual Assault in Schools — website with more information and resources
• Power of IX Checklist — Is your school doing enough to help end sexual harassment and assault, and following Title IX?
• Ending Harassment Now — Our groundbreaking investigative report about widespread sexual violence and sexual assault in education – and schools failing to comply with Title IX requirements for all survivors’ equity.

Legal Advice & Resources / Consejos y Recursos legales

Know your rights.

Learn what your rights are so you can navigate your situation and make the best decision for you.

Your Rights at Work

• Gender Discrimination
• Sexual Harassment
• Pay Discrimination

Your Rights at School

• Sexual Assault & Harassment

We may be able to provide free legal help for the following issues at California schools: gender and LGBTQI+ discrimination, sexual harassment, and sexual assault.

Apply for Legal Help

• School/Education

We have trained legal advocates and lawyers on staff to guide you through your legal issue.

• See what it's like to work with ERA.

Conozca Sus Derechos

Aprende sus derechos para que puedas navegar su situación y tomar la mejor decisión para ti.

Sus Derechos en el Trabajo

• California Pago Justo
• Acoso Sexual
• Trabajo Estando Embarazada

Contáctenos

Posible que podamos proveer ayuda legal por gratis por los siguientes problemas en el trabajo o la escuela: discriminación basado en el género o por LGBTQI+, acoso sexual, asalto sexual, y discriminación basado en el embarazo o por ser padre/madre.

Nuestro servicio de asesoramiento por teléfono está cerrado por ahora

En este momento, no estamos recibiendo solicitudes dejadas por un recado de teléfono. Sin embargo, usted puede someter una solicitud para una consulta por la manera de hacer clic en el links "Empleo" o "Educación."

• Skip to main content
• Skip to secondary menu
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Study Today

Largest Compilation of Structured Essays and Exams

Essay on Sexual Harassment (1196 Words)

June 6, 2018 by Study Mentor Leave a Comment

Sexual harassment is not just a term. It’s a whole phenomenon in itself. At times, it unfolds all at once or else it takes time. It is a much-debated topic in current times. What we need to realize is that mere discussions will not help alone.

We need to understand the depth of the topic and consider its complications; only then can we go ahead and place our respective views on it. Another angle that will be taken up in this essay is the society’s take on sexual harassment. We will discuss the views of Indian society as well as the western, so called ‘modern’ societies.

Sexual harassment is not a topic of this generation. It has existed and sadly, survived through the older generations. Earlier people considered it shameful to talk about it and would not bring it out in public spaces.

But now we have popular organisations, student groups and therapists discuss this motion out in open. It is not about the dimensions that you see in this issue. It is about the wholesome picture that it presents to you, whether you can grasp the concept as a whole or are you just clinging on to certain aspects of it.

Indian society often shuns the discussion on sexual harassment and embarrasses the victim. Well, the word ‘victim’ too puts the harassed in the weak position and brings out the idea of ‘damage has been done’. This further perpetrates a guilt feeling in the person who is harassed and makes them think that ‘they’ should have been more careful.

We need to understand that the words used by a society to describe the harassed person are often very harsh and crude. They are not at all sensitive towards the feelings of that person and do not even consider being gentle towards them. Harassed people are often treated as if they are offenders and have committed some crime.

The view that sexual harassment brings embarrassment to the harassed and that they should not voice it, needs to be done away with. We need to construct a more holistic approach towards this problem and bring out the fearful aspect of it.

The impacts of sexual harassment on the person who is harassed cannot be measured. The damage done, has not only been physical. It is mentally torturing for someone to have borne the pain and not been able to share with anyone. They cannot talk about it to people and this empowers the felon even more.

They lose their sense of dignity and look down upon their own selves. All this results in the willingness of the person to commit suicide, as they see no way out of it. All this because society shuns them and gives them no dignitary place.

This was the view on how Indian society treats its sexual harassment victims. Not just Indian actually but also Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan and a few more Asian nations. Contrasting this with the modern developed western worlds, do we see a very different image then the one we have already discussed about.

The western societies are more open about the claims to sexual harassment and they deal with it in a much more mature manner. There is a whole system and procedures in place which are activated when such a case comes up.

The famous cases of sexual harassment on Senator Bob Packwood and Six-year-old v. Brockton, Massachusetts School District; were dealt with in an appropriate manner. As a result of their act, in the former case the senator faced resignation from his post.

Latter case resulted in the school revising its sexual harassment policy. These cases, if compared to the Indian cases will make us realise how India took so long to come up with ‘Vishaka Guidelines’. Even though we had complaints regarding sexual harassment where former Punjab Director General of Police, KPS Gill was accused of harassing a senior IPS Officer in 1988.

From then till now, where we have heard of Ashok Kumar Ganguly, a former Supreme Court judge and Tarun Tejpal , chief editor of Tehelka magazine; we have had several cases of sexual harassment.

It took 20 years for the Indian judiciary to come up with laws to protect women from sexual harassment. Vishakha guidelines were taken as a law in 2013 which stood against harassment of women in workplace. What is astounding about this law is that it raises more questions than it answers.

Does this law not consider harassment at home or in any public domain to be equivalent to harassment in place? Does it not believe that even men can be victims of sexual harassment? Is it compulsorily going to be a woman who will be assaulted in India? These are the questions which have arisen in response to the vishakha guidelines, which too could not deliver justice to Bhanwari Devi’s rape case .

Nowadays we have many NGOs and university cells which are spreading awareness on sexual harassment and encouraging people to fight and speak up against it.

The recent Facebook campaign of ‘#MeToo’ also focuses on the aspect of trying to make people come out in open about their hidden fears of being judged because they were assaulted. This campaign took wings in a few days and many tweets and Facebook posts started to talk explicitly of how and where people were harassed.

Incident of sexual harassment don’t contain themselves to any particular age group. There are cases of harassment filed on behalf of juvenile girls in India, by their parents. From the age of three to seventy-two, we have had cases of women being harassed and exploited.

Age is not a factor which provokes such incidents, as claimed by many. How sexually developed is a three-year-old girl to be raped? what pleasure will anyone get by sexually abusing a seventy-two-year-old woman?

Often in India it is claimed that women are raped cause of their eating habits and because they put on denims. Well these notions are the most ridiculous ones for anyone to believe. There are people who wear denims and skirts every day and have not been raped whereas women in saree have also faced assault in India.

What dressing culture are our political leaders then talking about? Do they fail to look beyond the chains of culture and religion? Seems like, yes. They will do whatever that helps their vote bank politics. They fail to analyse the case in a proper manner and come up with bizarre conclusions.

What really causes the harassment cases to increase is the thinking and the perspectives that Indians hold towards each other, specially towards women. They need to consider women as equals and not as a subordinate gender, who is born to serve them.

The objectification of women in Bollywood also gives a lead to criminals who commit such crimes. Our song lyrics portray women in a very helpless manner and as enjoyable objects.

This change can happen only if people are educated to realise that the offender should be guilty and not the victim. Knowledge alone, via schooling or by campaigns of various human rights activists, can help them to rise above their current perspectives and treat women in a more equivalent manner.

Reader Interactions

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Top Trending Essays in March 2021

• Essay on Pollution
• Essay on my School
• Summer Season
• My favourite teacher
• World heritage day quotes
• my family speech
• importance of trees essay
• autobiography of a pen
• honesty is the best policy essay
• essay on building a great india
• my favourite book essay
• essay on caa
• my favourite player
• autobiography of a river
• farewell speech for class 10 by class 9
• essay my favourite teacher 200 words
• internet influence on kids essay
• my favourite cartoon character

Brilliantly

Content & links.

Verified by Sur.ly

Essay for Students

• Essay for Class 1 to 5 Students

Scholarships for Students

• Class 1 Students Scholarship
• Class 2 Students Scholarship
• Class 3 Students Scholarship
• Class 4 Students Scholarship
• Class 5 students Scholarship
• Class 6 Students Scholarship
• Class 7 students Scholarship
• Class 8 Students Scholarship
• Class 9 Students Scholarship
• Class 10 Students Scholarship
• Class 11 Students Scholarship
• Class 12 Students Scholarship

STAY CONNECTED

• About Study Today
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions

Scholarships

• Apj Abdul Kalam Scholarship
• Ashirwad Scholarship
• Bihar Scholarship
• Canara Bank Scholarship
• Colgate Scholarship
• Dr Ambedkar Scholarship
• E District Scholarship
• Epass Karnataka Scholarship
• Fair And Lovely Scholarship
• Floridas John Mckay Scholarship
• Inspire Scholarship
• Jio Scholarship
• Karnataka Minority Scholarship
• Lic Scholarship
• Maulana Azad Scholarship
• Medhavi Scholarship
• Minority Scholarship
• Moma Scholarship
• Mp Scholarship
• Muslim Minority Scholarship
• Nsp Scholarship
• Oasis Scholarship
• Obc Scholarship
• Odisha Scholarship
• Pfms Scholarship
• Post Matric Scholarship
• Pre Matric Scholarship
• Prerana Scholarship
• Prime Minister Scholarship
• Rajasthan Scholarship
• Santoor Scholarship
• Sitaram Jindal Scholarship
• Ssp Scholarship
• Swami Vivekananda Scholarship
• Ts Epass Scholarship
• Up Scholarship
• Vidhyasaarathi Scholarship
• Wbmdfc Scholarship
• West Bengal Minority Scholarship
• Click Here Now!!

Mobile Number

Have you Burn Crackers this Diwali ? Yes No

Warning: The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function. more...

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Policy and Global Affairs; Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine; Committee on the Impacts of Sexual Harassment in Academia; Benya FF, Widnall SE, Johnson PA, editors. Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2018 Jun 12.

Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

• Hardcopy Version at National Academies Press

2 Sexual Harassment Research

This chapter reviews the information gathered through decades of sexual harassment research. It provides definitions of key terms that will be used throughout the report, establishing a common framework from the research literature and the law for discussing these issues. In reviewing what sexual harassment research has learned over time, the chapter also examines the research methods for studying sexual harassment and the appropriate methods for conducting this research in a reliable way. The chapter provides information on the prevalence of sexual harassment and common characteristics of how sexual harassment is perpetrated and experienced across lines of industry, occupation, and social class. It concludes with common characteristics of environments where sexual harassment is more likely to occur.

• DEFINITIONS OF KEY TERMS

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines define sexual harassment as the following ( USEEOC n.d.a .):

Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual's employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual's work performance, or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment.

Sexual harassment was first recognized in cases in which women lost their jobs because they rejected sexual overtures from their employers (e.g., Barnes v. Costle 1977 1 ). This type of sexual harassment became defined as quid pro quo sexual harassment (Latin for “this for that,” meaning that a job or educational opportunity is conditioned on some kind of sexual performance). Such coercive behavior was judged to constitute a violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Soon it was recognized in employment law that pervasive sexist behavior from coworkers can create odious conditions of employment—what became known as a hostile work environment —and also constitute illegal discrimination ( Farley 1978 ; MacKinnon 1979 ; Williams v. Saxbe 1976 2 ). These two basic forms of sexual harassment, quid pro quo and hostile environment harassment, were summarized in guidelines issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 1980 ( USEEOC 1980 ).

Hostile work or educational environments can be created by behaviors such as addressing women in crude or objectifying terms, posting pornographic images in the office, and by making demeaning or derogatory statements about women, such as telling anti-female jokes. Hostile environment harassment also encompasses unwanted sexual overtures such as exposing one's genitals, stroking and kissing someone, and pressuring a person for dates even if no quid pro quo is involved ( Bundy v. Jackson 1981; 3 Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson 1986 4 ).

An important distinction between quid pro quo and hostile environment harassment is that the former usually involves a one-on-one relationship in which the perpetrator has control of employment- or educational-related rewards or punishments over the target. In contrast, the latter can involve many perpetrators and many targets. In the hostile environment form of sexual harassment, coworkers often exhibit a pattern of hostile sexist behavior toward multiple targets over an extended period of time ( Holland and Cortina 2016 ). For hostile sex-related or gender-related behavior to be considered illegal sexual harassment, it must be pervasive or severe enough to be judged as having had a negative impact upon the work or educational environment. Therefore, isolated or single instances of such behavior typically qualify only when they are judged to be sufficiently severe. Legal scholars and judges continue to use the two subtype definitions of quid pro quo and hostile environment to define sexual harassment.

Illegal sexual harassment falls under the umbrella of a more comprehensive category, discriminatory behavior . Illegal discrimination can occur on the basis of any legally protected category: race, ethnicity, religious creed, age, sex, gender identity, marital status, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, genetic information, physical or mental disabilities, veteran status, prior conviction of a crime, gender identity or expression, or membership in other protected classes set forth in state or federal law. Regarding sexual harassment, the focus of this report, this includes gender harassment , a term designed to emphasize that harmful or illegal sexual harassment does not have to be about sexual activity ( USEEOC n.d.b .). Sexual harassment constitutes discrimination because it is harmful and it is based on gender—it is not necessarily motivated by sexual desire nor does it need to involve sexual activity.

Both legal doctrine and social science research recognize gender as encompassing both one's biological sex and gender-based stereotypes and expectations, such as heterosexuality and proper performance of gender roles. Sexual harassment in the form of gender harassment can be based on the violation of cultural gender stereotypes. For example, a man may experience gender harassment for being a “sissy” or being easily embarrassed by pornography (violating stereotypes that men should be strong, heterosexual, and sexually bold). While a woman may be gender harassed for taking a job traditionally held by a man or in a traditionally male field. Gender harassment in such a situation might consist of actions to sabotage the woman's tools, machinery, or equipment, or telling the woman she is not smart enough for scientific work. Subsequent sections of this report discuss gender harassment in greater detail.

Psychologists who study gender-related behavior have developed more nuanced terms to describe sexual harassment in order to more precisely measure and account for the behaviors that constitute sexual harassment and to describe how targets experience those behaviors. A three-part classification system divides sexual harassment into distinct but related categories: sexual coercion , unwanted sexual attention , and gender harassment (see Figure 2-1 ; Fitzgerald et al. 1988 ; 5 Fitzgerald, Gelfand, and Drasgow 1995 ; Gelfand, Fitzgerald, and Drasgow 1995 ).

The relationship between discriminatory behaviors, sex/gender discrimination, sexual harassment, gender harassment, quid pro quo sexual harassment, and hostile environment harassment. While sexual coercion is by definition quid pro quo sexual harassment, (more...)

Sexual coercion entails sexual advances, and makes the conditions of employment (or education, for students) contingent upon sexual cooperation.

Unwanted sexual attention also entails sexual advances, but it does not add professional rewards or threats to force compliance. In this category are expressions of romantic or sexual interest that are unwelcome, unreciprocated, and offensive to the target; examples include unwanted touching, hugging, stroking, and persistent requests for dates or sexual behavior despite discouragement, and can include assault ( Cortina, Koss, and Cook 2018 ; Fitzgerald, Gelfand, and Drasgow 1995 ; Fitzgerald, Swan, and Magley 1997 ).

Gender harassment is by far the most common type of sexual harassment. It refers to ‘‘a broad range of verbal and nonverbal behaviors not aimed at sexual cooperation but that convey insulting, hostile, and degrading attitudes about” members of one gender ( Fitzgerald, Gelfand, and Drasgow 1995 , 430). Gender harassment is further defined as two types: sexist hostility and crude harassment . Examples of the sexist hostility form of gender harassment for women include demeaning jokes or comments about women, comments that women do not belong in leadership positions or are not smart enough to succeed in a scientific career, and sabotaging women. The crude harassment form of gender harassment is defined as the use of sexually crude terms that denigrate people based on their gender (e.g., using insults such as “slut” to refer to a female coworker or “pussy” to refer to a male coworker; Fitzgerald, Gelfand, and Drasgow 1995 ).

Both women and men can and do experience all three forms of sexual harassment, but some subgroups face higher rates than others. For example, women who are lesbian or bisexual ( Cortina et al. 1998 ; Konik and Cortina 2008 ), women who endorse gender-egalitarian beliefs ( Dall'Ara and Maass 1999 ; Siebler, Sabelus, and Bohner 2008 ), and women who are stereotypically masculine in behavior, appearance, or personality ( Berdahl 2007b ; Leskinen, Rabelo, and Cortina 2015 ) experience sexual harassment at higher rates than other women. Likewise, men who are gay, transgender, petite, or in some way perceived as “not man enough” encounter more harassment than other men ( Berdahl 2007b ; Fitzgerald and Cortina 2017 ; Rabelo and Cortina 2014 ).

Interestingly, the motivation underlying sexual coercion and unwanted sexual attention behaviors appears different from the motivation underlying gender harassment. Whereas the first two categories suggest sexual advances (the goal being sexual exploitation of women), the third category is expressing hostility toward women (the goals being insult, humiliation, or ostracism) ( Holland and Cortina 2016 ). In other words, sexual coercion and unwanted sexual attention can be viewed as “come-ons,” while gender harassment is, for all intents and purposes, a “put-down” ( Fitzgerald, Gelfand, and Drasgow 1995 ; Leskinen, Cortina, and Kabat 2011 ). However, it is important to note that these come-on behaviors are not necessarily about attraction to women; more often than not, they are instead motivated by the desire to devalue women or punish those who violate gender norms ( Berdahl 2007b ; Cortina and Berdahl 2008 ).

Some researchers further define the verbal insults associated with gender harassment, along with accompanying nonverbal affronts, as microaggressions. This term refers to “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative” messages ( Sue et al. 2007 , 271) to or about historically stigmatized groups. This term can also be broken down into three categories: microassaults, microinsults, and microinvalidations ( Sue et al. 2007 ). There is some concern that microaggression remains a poorly defined construct, with porous boundaries. Additionally, the use of the term micro is misleading, as it implies all these experiences are minor or imperceptible acts. Yet some microaggressions, such as referring to people by using offensive names, are obviously offensive and can be deeply damaging. Similarly the root word aggression is also misleading, as most experts reserve this term for behavior that carries intent to harm ( Lilienfeld 2017 ). For these reasons, our committee chose to focus on incivility , a term in greater use in the workplace aggression literature.

Incivility refers to “low-intensity deviant behavior with ambiguous intent to harm the target, in violation of workplace norms for mutual respect. Uncivil behaviors are characteristically rude and discourteous, displaying a lack of regard for others” ( Andersson and Pearson 1999 , 457). Lim and Cortina's 2005 study on two female populations in public-sector organizations (Ns = 833 and 1,425) revealed that sexual harassment often takes place against a backdrop of incivility, or in other words, in an environment of generalized disrespect. The authors argue that, based on their findings, the same perpetrator “may instigate multiple forms of mistreatment—both sexualized and generalized—in efforts to debase women and reinforce or raise their own social advantage” (492). Lim and Cortina point out that if sexual harassment is tolerated in an organization or not seen as a deviant behavior, incidents of general incivility would be expected to be even less likely to receive attention from management. Based on these findings, it could be argued that generalized incivility should be a red flag for leadership or management in work and education environments, because when gender harassment occurs, it is virtually always in environments with high rates of uncivil conduct ( Cortina et al. 2002 ; Lim and Cortina 2005 ).

Note that sexual harassment is often ambient , meaning it is “not clearly targeted at any individual or group of individuals” ( Parker 2008 , 947) in the work or education environment or behavior that goes beyond the direct target of the harassment ( Glomb et al. 1997 ). Ambient sexual harassment is determined by a general “frequency of sexually harassing behavior experienced by others” and can include all types of sexually harassing behavior (309). For example, it can include pornography being displayed in a common area or sexually abusive language being used publicly in the work or education environment ( Parker 2008 ). Ambient unwanted sexual attention and sexual coercion refer to observed instances of unwanted sexual pursuit, targeted at a fellow employee. In other words, one need not be personally targeted to feel the effects of sexual harassment (much like second-hand smoke).

Despite refined definitions and terms to describe sexual harassment and gender discrimination, documenting the degree of these behaviors in work and education environments remains challenging. This is in part because individuals experiencing these behaviors rarely label them as such. Numerous studies have demonstrated that more than half of working women report experiencing sexually harassing behavior at work, but less than 20 percent of those women actually describe the experience as “sexual harassment” ( Ellis, Barak, and Pinto 1991 ; Ilies et al. 2003 ; Magley, Hulin, et al. 1999 ; Magley and Shupe 2005 ).

Considering these sources, the report uses the following definition of sexual harassment:

Sexual harassment (a form of discrimination) is composed of three categories of behavior: (1) gender harassment (verbal and nonverbal behaviors that convey hostility, objectification, exclusion, or second-class status about members of one gender), (2) unwanted sexual attention (verbal or physical unwelcome sexual advances, which can include assault), and (3) sexual coercion (when favorable professional or educational treatment is conditioned on sexual activity). Harassing behavior can be either direct (targeted at an individual) or ambient (a general level of sexual harassment in an environment).

Box 2-1 provides a quick review of the key terms introduced in this chapter.

Summary of Key Terms.

• RESEARCH METHODS USED TO EXAMINE SEXUAL HARASSMENT

The goal of providing recommendations for preventing sexual harassment and mitigating its effects in academic science, engineering, and medicine requires evidence-based research. Different studies have different strengths and weaknesses, and these should be kept in mind when reviewing their findings, particularly if leaders in academic institutions, legislators, and researchers hope to design meaningful and effective interventions and policies. The two most commonly used study methods are surveys and laboratory experiments. Important findings have also emerged using in-depth interviews, case studies, sociolegal analyses, and other methods. When conducting or reviewing research examining sexual harassment, it is crucial that the methods used to conduct the research match the goals for the research. It is crucial to note that the prevalence of sexual harassment in a population is best estimated using representative surveys and not by relying on the invariably lower number of official reports of sexual harassment made to an organization (see the discussion in Chapter 4 about how rare it is for women to formally report their experience). The next sections discuss these various research methods and the kind of information they provide.

Survey Methods

Surveys, containing well-validated instruments, can be useful in estimating the prevalence (how common sexual harassment experiences or behaviors are among people in a given population) and determining correlates, antecedents, outcomes, and factors that attenuate or amplify outcomes from sexual harassment. For instance, they can assess links between harassment and different aspects of targets' well-being, targets' understanding of the resources available to them, and the strategies they use to cope. Basing a survey on a defined population accessible from a comprehensive list, or sample frame, can be helpful. Sometimes, too, using multiple instruments and data sources can be a highly effective approach. Though surveys have often focused on the targets of sexually harassing behavior (e.g., Fitzgerald, Drasgow, and Magley 1999 ), some work has also been done examining self-descriptions by perpetrators (e.g., Dekker and Barling 1998 ) and bystanders (e.g., Hitlan, Schneider, and Walsh 2006 ; Richman-Hirsch and Glomb 2002 ; Miner-Rubino and Cortina 2004 , 2007 ).

Conducting surveys on sexual harassment is challenging, but fortunately researchers have addressed many of these challenges. Those wishing to conduct a survey on sexual harassment ought to follow the scientific methods described below and the ethical and safety guidelines for this type of research ( WHO 2001 ). Poorly conducting surveys on sexual harassment is unethical because responding to the survey could needlessly retraumatize the respondent. Additionally, the resulting inaccurate data from such a survey could be used to question the importance and legitimacy of such an important and sensitive topic ( WHO 2001 ).

An initial challenge in conducting survey research on sexual harassment is that many women are not likely to label their experiences as sexual harassment. Additionally, women who experience the gender harassment type of sexual harassment are more than 7 times less likely to label their experiences as “sexual harassment” than women who experience unwanted sexual attention or sexual coercion ( Holland and Cortina 2013 ). This illustrates what other research has shown: that in both the law and the lay public, the dominant understandings of sexual harassment overemphasize two forms of sexual harassment, sexual coercion and unwanted sexual attention, while downplaying the third (most common) type—gender harassment (see Figure 2-2 ; Leskinen, Cortina, and Kabat 2011 ; Schultz 1998 ). Regardless of whether women self-label their experiences as sexual harassment or not, they all have similar negative psychological and professional outcomes ( Magley, Hulin, et al. 1999 ; Woodzicka and LaFrance 2005 ).

The public consciousness of sexual harassment and specific sexually harassing behaviors.

This labeling issue was first identified in research on rape and sexual violence. Surveys conducted by Koss (1992) revealed that when respondents were asked simply, “Have you been raped?” estimates of the number of people raped in the college population were very low, yet when asked whether they had experienced a series of specific behaviors that would meet legal criteria for rape, estimates of the number of people raped were much higher. Subsequent studies of sexual harassment found similar results ( Ilies et al. 2003 ; Schneider, Pryor, and Fitzgerald 2011 ), and Fitzgerald and colleagues (1988) established the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ) to standardize questions about specific sexual harassment behaviors rather than asking about “sexual harassment” generally. With extensive psychometric evidence supporting it, the SEQ has become the gold standard in the assessment of sexual harassment experiences in both work and school settings ( Cortina and Berdahl 2008 ). Unfortunately, some recent studies attempting to measure the prevalence of sexual harassment have not followed this good practice and are thus likely to have low prevalence rates, be missing data about those who have experienced gender harassment, and as a result be unreliable for evaluating the prevalence of sexual harassment.

Another hurdle faced by surveys on sexual harassment is that women who have experienced sexual harassment may be reluctant to respond to a survey on the topic or to admit being a target or victim because sexual harassment can be stigmatizing, humiliating, and traumatizing ( Greco, O'Boyle, and Walter 2015 ; Bumiller 1987 , 1992 ). To encourage open self-reports, it is important that survey responses are confidential, if not anonymous, and to reassure survey participants that this is the case. Additionally, to help avoid a nonresponse bias (i.e., some segments of a population selectively declining to participate), sexual harassment experts do not use the term sexual harassment or sexual misconduct in the survey title and instead situate their questions about sexual harassment within a broader survey that asks about social concerns such as gender issues, civility, or culture. In a meta-analytic review of the incidence of sexual harassment in the United States, Ilies and colleagues (2003) found that directly asking respondents whether they had experienced sexual harassment (as opposed to using questionnaires that list behaviors that constitute sexual harassment) led to substantially lower estimates of sexual harassment incidence.

When determining prevalence estimates, attention must be given to minimizing nonresponse biases in the survey sample. Nonresponse biases include attitudes and other characteristics that disincline people from survey participation ( Krosnick et al. 2015 ). A reluctance to answer questions about sexually harassing experiences could represent a nonresponse bias. While low response rates are not synonymous with low levels of nonresponse bias, generally low response rates should be interpreted with caution and will raise limitations on what conclusions can be drawn because of the representativeness of the survey sample ( Dillman, Smyth, and Christian 2008 ; Ilies et al. 2003 ). Just as it is important to be cautious about deriving prevalence estimates from samples with lower response rates, researchers and leaders in academic institutions must also be judicious when deriving such estimates from nonprobability samples (see Yeager, Krosnick, and Javitz [2009] for a discussion of the problems with opt-in internet surveys). 6

A challenge for any survey that is particularly important for sexual harassment surveys is their ability to gather information about nonmajority members of a given workplace or campus. Often women of color and sexual- and gender-minority women have been underrepresented among survey respondents, resulting in unreliable prevalence rates for these specific populations. Recent research is beginning to address this by looking at sexual harassment through the lens of intersectionality and by working to oversample these underrepresented populations when conducting surveys.

Convenience sampling (in which participants are recruited from social media or specialized groups with a specific target group in mind) and snowball sampling (recruiting additional subjects by asking participants who else they know in their networks who would also know about the topic) are useful means of recruiting hard-to-reach or underrepresented populations (e.g., lesbians who are not “out” at work, minority groups for whom no lists are available) ( Meyer and Wilson 2009 ). These studies can yield critical insights, even though the samples cannot be considered representative of a particular population. A good example of this approach is the recent study about the experiences of women of color in the fields of astronomy and planetary science, identified via convenience sampling. The researchers found that women of color were more likely to report hearing sexist remarks from supervisors or peers in the workplace than did white women, white men, or men of color. Women of color were also more likely to feel unsafe at work because of their gender ( Clancy et al. 2017 ). This study shows how survey data can be used to test relationships among important variables such as race, gender, sexual harassment, and sense of safety, yielding conclusions about who is most likely to be targeted for sexually harassing behaviors, and with what effects.

When determining and comparing prevalence rates, it is important to distinguish the prevalence rates for women separate from men and not to rely on a combined prevalence for both genders. Relying on combined rates will result in a lower rate because women are much more likely to experience sexual harassment than men ( USMSPB 1995 ; Magley, Waldo, et al. 1999 ; Ilies et al. 2003 ; Kabat-Farr and Cortina 2014 ).

Another methodological feature to be particularly attentive to when estimating and comparing prevalence rates is the time period respondents are asked about. In some studies, no time limit is given, while others may limit it to the last 12 or 24 months. The longer the time period, the more likely the rates will be skewed and not assess current incidence. Longer time periods can result in higher incidence rates because more time means more women are likely to have experienced such behavior. However, after long enough periods, memory deterioration sets in, leaving behind only those sexual harassment experiences that left a lasting memory, and leaving out everyday sexist comments or ambient harassment. Additionally, longer time periods can also introduce the risk that the incident could have occurred at a past environment, not the current one under investigation.

Lastly, a key obstacle to obtaining accurate prevalence numbers across academia and between fields or workplaces is the number of surveys available that do not always use a standardized method for measuring or defining sexual harassment. Unfortunately, when institutions make their decisions about which survey or questions to use, they often do not seem to be aware of good practices in sexual harassment research or to have consulted with a sexual harassment researcher, because different methodologies and measurement approaches have been used ( Wood et al. 2017 ). As a result, the surveys not only produce unreliable prevalence numbers but also pose a risk of “comparing apples to oranges” when analyzing the data across institutions. The largest concern when comparing prevalence rates is differences in how sexual harassment is defined in the survey and during the analysis of the responses. A meta-analysis of sexual harassment surveys demonstrates that the prevalence rate is 24 percent when women are asked whether they have experienced “sexual harassment” versus 58 percent when they are asked whether they experienced harassing behaviors that meet the definition of sexual harassment (and are then classified as such in the analysis) ( Ilies et al. 2003 ). In other words, the direct query method gives an estimate of prevalence based on the respondent's perception, while the behavioral experiences method estimates the extent to which potentially harassing incidents happen in an organization. This research also demonstrates that these differences were not due to differences in work environments or to sampling method ( Ilies et al. 2003 ).

To try to present the most accurate information on the prevalence of sexual harassment, the report references surveys that follow good practices in both sexual harassment research and survey research and that clearly identify differences in time period and definitions.

Experimental Methods

Another way that information has been gathered about sexual harassment has been through laboratory experiments, in which researchers examine the occurrence of sexually harassing behaviors by manipulating variables under controlled conditions. The advantage of this approach is that researchers can directly observe sexually harassing behavior. This approach, however, does not provide information on the prevalence of sexual harassment.

Some of the behaviors that have been directly observed in experiments include the following:

• Unsolicited sexual touching by someone in a supervisory role ( Pryor, LaVite, and Stoller 1993 );
• Unsolicited touching from peers ( Pryor 1987 );
• Nonverbal dominance behaviors ( Murphy, Driscoll, and Kelly 1999 );
• Sending unsolicited pornographic materials electronically ( Dall'Ara and Maass 1999 ; Maass et al. 2003 );
• Sending sexist jokes electronically ( Galdi, Maass, and Cadinu 2014 );
• Sending sexual come-ons electronically ( Diehl, Rees, and Bohner 2012 );
• Asking sexist questions in an interview ( Hitlan et al. 2009 ); and
• Sexualized behavior, such as staring at a woman's body, during an interview ( Rudman and Borgida 1995 ).

Laboratory experiments can help uncover situational factors that encourage or discourage potential perpetrators from engaging in sexually harassing behavior. For instance, experiments show that sexual harassment is less likely to occur if those behaviors are not accepted by authority figures ( Pryor, LaVite, and Stoller 1993 ). Another experiment found that men exposed to sexist television portrayals of women were more likely to send sexist jokes to women in an online interaction ( Galdi, Maass, and Cadinu 2014 ).

Laboratory experiments can also provide a snapshot of how women might respond in a sexually harassing situation. For example, research by Woodzicka and LaFrance (2001) reveals the difference between how women think they would respond and how they do respond. In the first study, college women were asked to imagine how they would respond to being asked sexist questions during a job interview. In the second study, women participated in what they thought to be an actual job interview where such questions were asked. Results showed a disconnect between what women thought they would do (get angry, confront, and complain) and what they actually did (become fearful, neither confront nor complain).

On the other hand, there are also limitations to laboratory experiments. While they can reveal responses to actual behaviors, those reactions occur in an artificial laboratory setting (not a real professional or educational setting, with people who have real relationships, interdependencies, status hierarchies, etc.). Participants in experiments are often college students who have limited work experience and diversity (primarily white, middle class, under the age of 20). Also, experiments provide a snapshot of only one moment of time, providing a single look at behaviors and responses. Surveys and accounts from litigants in sexual harassment cases suggest that the worst cases of sexual harassment are not isolated incidents, but something that takes place over a period of time ( Cantalupo and Kidder 2017a , 2017b ), which experiments cannot assess.

Interviews, Case Studies, and Other Qualitative Methods

Qualitative research offers a wide range of methodologies that can be useful in understanding sexual harassment, though it is best known for individual, semi-structured interviews ( Bazeley 2003 ). Qualitative research can also be conducted in focus groups, bringing together similar constituencies in order to facilitate conversations among participants. Several social science disciplines also use ethnographic or autoethnographic methods. Ethnography is a systematic way of participating and observing in particular settings or cultures to answer research questions about the intersection of culture and lived experience, where autoethnography invites researchers to reflect on their personal experiences, and connect those experiences to a wider research question. For instance, much of the early work on sexual harassment in the field sciences was either interviews or autoethnography, particularly among cultural anthropologists, who often conduct their field work alone (e.g., Sharp and Kremer 2006 ). Qualitative approaches also include textual analysis of existing primary sources (e.g., studying science syllabi or job postings for gendered language), and case studies or narratives, where a single story is followed in depth. Case study data is often collected via interview, the difference being that rather than interviewing a large enough number to achieve saturation, a researcher will go for greater depth with each participant to construct a more detailed narrative (e.g., Banerjee and Pawley 2013 ).

Qualitative approaches are widely recognized as the method of choice for generating insight into complex phenomena, the contexts in which they occur, and their consequences ( Cho, Crenshaw, and McCall 2013 ). Such methods are thought to be particularly well suited to providing key background information and highlighting the experiences and perceptions of targets of oppression, such as those who have experienced sexual harassment. The approach also gives a voice to perspectives that tend not to be heard or to those with experiences that have few precedents in prior research ( Sofaer 1999 ).

Sociolegal Methods

Sociolegal studies is an interdisciplinary field in which scholars use all the research methods described above (surveys, experiments, interviews, case studies, ethnography) to study a wide range of topics about formal laws, law-like systems of rules, and the social and political relationships that help constitute what law is ( Banakar and Travers 2005 ). Legal research methods are also a part of sociolegal methods, and these include doctrinal analysis, legal history and doctrinal development studies, and answering questions about exactly what formal legal rules exist across jurisdictions and interrelated areas of law, where there is often ambiguity and conflict. Sociolegal scholars are, of course, attentive to what formal rules and laws actually exist (with sexual harassment, it is Title VII and Title IX doctrines), but a starting approach is to presume that what law is and how it works is much more complex than doctrinal study alone can reveal.

Sociolegal research methods tend to be based in the empirical, observational social sciences supported by legal research. Classic studies using these methods have documented how ordinary people generally resolve their disputes using local customs and norms rather than formal law ( Macaulay 1963 ; Ellickson 1991 ); how bringing a personal injury claim in a small community is a mark of outsider, subordinated status ( Engel 1984 ); and how difficult it can be for people who have experienced discrimination to use legal protections, because doing so causes them to feel victimized again ( Bumiller 1992 ). These types of sociolegal studies share the strengths and limitations of ethnographic and qualitative research methods generally: on the one hand, they can capture the rich contextual detail of a particular setting, group of people, and set of relationships, but on the other hand, they are limited in time and location, and do not yield broadly generalizable claims. Nonetheless, decades of research using these methods have yielded a considerable body of research that strongly suggests that what the formal law is and what people understand it to be are often quite far apart; that using formal systems to make claims about wrongs done to them is a very difficult thing for most people to do, though it can be empowering and produce social change; and that laws and the legal system typically support existing power structures rather than fundamentally reshape them ( Freeman 1978 ; Edelman 2016 ; Berrey, Nelson, and Nielsen 2017 ).

A sociolegal research method requires study of the law at many levels of experience to approach sexual harassment, for example, because it matters just as much what women think they deserve or will likely get as what the law formally offers them. Anna-Maria Marshall's study of sexual harassment experiences among female staff members at a midwestern university in 1997–1998, for example, combined in-depth interviewing of 25 female staff members with legal analysis at the national level, policy analysis at the university level, and a survey sent to 1,000 female employees selected at random from a university workplace to understand what counted as sexual harassment from their perspectives ( Marshall 2005 ). Whether something in a science, engineering, and medicine educational or workplace setting is sexual harassment is a category of experience for everyone involved, in other words, that must be assigned meaning, obligations, rights, duties, and processes.

Sociolegal scholars can also bridge between the social science methodologies and the law through research on what they call the “iceberg” or the “tip-of-the-iceberg” problem. The tip-of-the-iceberg problem is the recognition by researchers that published legal disputes are a very skewed and systematically unrepresentative sample from the universe of disputes. As Peter Siegelman and John Donohue (1990) describe the problem, “Most potential disputes never get defined by the actors as such, most actual disputes don't go to court, most court cases are settled rather than adjudicated, and most adjudicated cases are not appealed” (1133). Their analysis of published and unpublished district court opinions suggests that cases that reach the stage of a published judicial opinion may concern newer areas of case law or more dramatic or unusual circumstances that help explain why these cases were not disposed of earlier and before they appear for researchers to find. Publication as a legal outcome is one of the only ways a sexual harassment case could come to be known and studied, but there are many more legally protected routes to keeping cases and their outcomes from view. Confidential settlements, nondisclosure agreements, confidential notations in an academic or employment record, and dispositions of complaints that are not written down are all outcomes that cannot be studied, tracked, counted, or assessed.

Even when legal scholars attempt to collect samples of hundreds of sexual harassment claims, such as Ann Juliano and Stewart J. Schwab's 2000 survey of every reported federal district and appellate court ruling on sexual harassment between 1986 and 1995, totaling nearly 650, they concede that these cases are not representative of the universe of incidents. Juliano and Schwab found that the most successful cases involved sexual conduct directed at a specific target in a mostly male workplace that the target had complained about but which the employer had failed to respond to with any formal process ( Juliano and Schwab 2000 , 593). Another study, Nancy Chi Cantalupo and William Kidder's (2017b) recent study of sexual harassment in the academic context, attempts to pull cases from as far down the iceberg as possible, drawing in incidents recorded in more venues than the usual publication sources for judicial opinions, including media reports, administrative civil rights investigations at the Departments of Education and Justice, published lawsuits by students, and lawsuits over reinstatement for faculty members fired for sexual harassment. Cantalupo and Kidder find more physical (as opposed to verbal) harassment conduct and more evidence of serial harassers in documented complaints than survey researchers have found, for example. Even if they are not based in representative samples of cases and thus cannot be used to generalize about harassment rates, studies such as these can still yield important research conclusions about sexual harassment adjudications and judicial attitudes toward them.

• PREVALENCE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT

Studies on sexual harassment from the 1980s through today continue to show that sexual harassment of women is widespread in workplaces and that the rates of sexual harassment have not significantly decreased. Studies have also identified common characteristics of sexual harassment in different workplaces and uncovered characteristics of workplaces that are associated with higher rates of sexual harassment. This section and the next one review what research can tell us about the trends in sexual harassment rates over time and what the common characteristics are of sexual harassment and sexually harassing environments.

Wherever possible, the report cites the most recent scientific studies of a topic. That said, the empirical research into sexual harassment, using rigorous scientific methods, dates back to the 1980s. This report cites conclusions from the earlier work when those results reveal historical trends or patterns over time. It also cites results from earlier studies when there is no theoretical reason to expect findings to have changed with the passage of time. For example, the inverse relationship between sexual harassment and job satisfaction is a robust one: the more an individual is harassed on the job, the less she or he likes that job. That basic finding has not changed over the course of 30 years, and there is no reason to expect that it will.

To access the trends in prevalence for sexual harassment, ideally we would examine longitudinal data that uses a well-validated behavior-based instrument for different workplaces and industries; unfortunately, this data is not available. The U.S. Merit System Protection Board (USMSPB) was one of the first organizations to study sexual harassment, with a focus on the federal workforce, which includes a variety of job types and workplace environments. The USMSPB surveys, conducted in 1980, 1987, 1994, and 2016, asked scientifically selected samples of federal workers about their experiences of specific forms of sexual harassment 7 at work in the past 24 months. These surveys used behavioral questions; however, they did not use the SEQ, and in earlier years the survey did not ask about nonsexualized forms of gender harassment such as sexist comments, which are known to be the most common form of sexual harassment ( Kabat-Farr and Cortina 2014 ). As a result, this is not a good source of longitudinal data covering all three forms of sexual harassment.

This survey does, however, provide an opportunity to assess a population's understanding of the term sexual harassment. The USMSPB conducted surveys that asked respondents whether they would classify certain behaviors as “sexual harassment.” The results showed that from 1980 to 2016 the proportion of respondents who classify the behaviors as sexual harassment rose, demonstrating an improvement in the population's understanding of that term. The percentage of men who believe that pressuring a female coworker for sexual favors is sexual harassment rose from 65 percent in 1980 to 93 percent in 1994 and to 97 percent in 2016. Likewise, the percentage of men who perceived unwanted sexual remarks in the workplace as being sexual harassment rose from 42 percent in 1980 to 64 percent in 1994 and to 94 percent in 2016. There was also an increase seen in the perceptions of women—the percentage of women who considered a coworker's sexual remarks as sexual harassment rose from 54 percent in 1980 to 77 percent in 1994 and to 95 percent in 2016. It is also significant to note that of respondents experiencing sexual harassing behaviors in the 2016 survey, only about 11 percent took any kind of formal action, such as filing a complaint or report with their organization ( USMSPB 2018 ). As the results just discussed demonstrate, this lack of reporting was not due to respondents inaccurately defining sexual harassment; rather, it reflects a reluctance by people to take formal action, which will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 4 .

The U.S. military is the other organization to study sexual harassment through large surveys early on and over multiple years. Starting in 1995 and going to 2012 8 the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) has used an SEQ-format survey that asked about more than 20 specific sex- or gender-related behaviors experienced in the past 12 months. As shown in the results in Table 2-1 , the data demonstrate that the prevalence of all three types of sexual harassment has been consistent. It also demonstrates that the gender-harassing form of sexual harassment (broken out into crude and offensive behavior and sexist behavior) is by far the most prevalent type of sexually harassing behavior, a finding that is consistent with research in other workplace settings ( Kabat-Farr and Cortina 2014 ).

Rate of Active Duty Military Women Experiencing Sexually Harassing Behaviors at Least Once in the Past 12 Months as Measured in 2000, 2006, 2010, and 2012.

Given that there is limited longitudinal data on the prevalence of sexual harassment that uses a well-validated behavior-based instrument, the best analysis of the prevalence of sexual harassment across workplaces and time comes from a meta-analysis by Ilies and colleagues (2003) . Based on more than 86,000 respondents from 55 probability samples, Illies and colleagues demonstrate that on average, 58 percent of women experience sexually harassing behaviors at work. Looking further into the different workplace sectors, the researchers found that there was some variation between sectors, with the prevalence ranging from 43 to 69 percent (this is discussed further in Chapter 3 when comparing the academic environment to other sectors). Their analysis of trends over time revealed that over the 25 years examined, women who responded to surveys with behavioral-based instruments (and which used a probability sample) reported increasingly more experiences of sexual harassment. The authors note that their data cannot investigate the reasons for this change, and that only a time-trend analysis of data obtained from the same instruments can truly answer the question of what is the trend in prevalence rates.

• CHARACTERISTICS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND SEXUALLY HARASSING ENVIRONMENTS

Rigorous survey research has identified common characteristics of sexual harassment. This work pushes against some of the main assumptions made on what it is, as well as how sexual harassment affects the targets, the bystanders, and the atmosphere of work and education settings. Here the chapter describes some of the aspects of sexual harassment that are strongly supported by the literature. However, we note that the data on varying experiences of sexual harassment of women of color, sexual minorities, and gender minorities is sparse, so these characteristics are likely to reflect the experience of majority women.

Characteristics of Sexual Harassment

Women are more likely to be sexually harassed than men and to experience sexual harassment at higher frequencies ( USMSPB 1995 ; Magley, Hulin et al. 1999 ; Ilies et al. 2003 ; Kabat-Farr and Cortina 2014 ). The 2012 DMDC survey results shown in Table 2-2 demonstrate that across all three types of sexual harassment, female personnel, compared with their male counterparts, were more likely to have experienced at least one instance of sexually harassing conduct over the prior 12 months. Likewise, in the 1994 USMSPB study of federal workers, it found more women (44 percent) than men (19 percent) describing experiences of any of seven types of sexually harassing behavior in the past 2 years at work ( USMSPB 1995 ). In a more recent study using the SEQ, Rosenthal, Smidt, and Freyd (2016) surveyed 525 graduate students regarding their exposure to sexual harassment while in graduate school. Female students were 1.64 times more likely to have experienced sexually harassing behavior from faculty or staff (38 percent) compared with male students (23 percent). Though the occasional survey reports no significant gender difference (e.g., Konik and Cortina 2008 ) in a specific group, many studies have found women encountering more sexually harassing conduct than men encounter.

Rate of Active Duty Military Women and Men Experiencing Sexually Harassing Behaviors at Least Once in the Past 12 Months.

The overwhelming majority of sexual harassment involves some form of gender harassment (the put-downs of sexual harassment that include sexist hostility and crude behavior). Unwanted sexual attention is the next most common form of sexual harassment, and only a small minority of women experience sexual coercion. For instance, Schneider, Swan, and Fitzgerald (1997) analyzed data from two samples of women: factory workers and university faculty/staff. In both samples, gender harassment was by far the most common experience: 54–60 percent of women described some encounter with gender harassment, either with or without unwanted sexual attention. In contrast, sexual coercion was rare, described by approximately 4 percent of women in each sample. Moreover, sexual coercion never took place without unwanted sexual attention and gender harassment. When analyzing the sexual harassment of graduate students, Rosenthal, Smidt, and Freyd (2016) found that 59 percent of harassment incidents involved some form of gender harassment, while only 5 percent included unwanted touching, and less than 4 percent entailed sexual coercion. In another study, Leskinen, Cortina, and Kabat (2011) analyzed survey data from two samples of women who work in highly male-dominated sectors: the military and the law. Focusing only on data from women who had encountered at least one sexually harassing behavior in the prior year, they found that 9 of every 10 people who experienced sexual harassment had encountered gender harassment with little or no unwanted sexual attention or coercion. While a recent national survey of 615 working men found that of the 25 percent of male respondents that admitted they had done at least one sexually harassing behavior in the last year, the most common form was gender harassment and the least common was sexual coercion ( Patel, Griggs, and Miller 2017 ).

That gender harassment is the most common type of sexual harassment is an unexpected finding in terms of what constitutes sexual harassment because unwanted sexual advances and sexual coercion are the most commonly reported both in official Title IX/Human Resources documentation ( Cantalupo and Kidder 2017a , 2017b ) and in the media. 9 This is in part why the misguided idea that sexual harassment is about sex has persisted.

In the vast majority of incidents of sexual harassment of women, men are the perpetrators. For instance, in the 1994 USMSPB study, 93 percent of sexually harassed women reported their perpetrators to be male ( USMSPB 1995 ). The DMDC's 1995 study turned up remarkably similar results, with 92 percent of sexually harassed women describing male perpetrators ( Magley, Waldo et al. 1999 ). In Rosenthal, Smidt, and Freyd's (2016) study of the sexual harassment of graduate students, among those who had been sexually harassed by faculty/staff, 86 percent of women described their harassers as male. Even when men are the targets of sexually harassing conduct, more often than not the perpetrator is also male (see also Kabat-Farr and Cortina 2014 ; Magley, Waldo et al. 1999 ).

Women are frequently harassed by coworkers and other employees (for students, it is fellow peers); superiors are not the most common perpetrators 10 ( USMSPB 1995 , 2018; AAUW 2005 ; Schneider, Pryor, and Fitzgerald 2011 ; Rosenthal, Smidt, and Freyd 2016 ). For example, in Rosenthal, Smidt, and Freyd's (2016) study of graduate students, 38 percent of female participants self-reported that they had experienced sexual harassment from faculty or staff, while 58 percent described sexual harassment from other students. In a study by Huerta and colleagues (2006) , student targets of sexual harassment described the harassing experience that bothered them the most. Fully three-quarters of these targets indicated the perpetrator of this “most bothersome” incident to be a peer (fellow student), whereas only one-quarter had perpetrators who were higher-status individuals (staff, faculty, or administrators).

Targets of sexual harassment often face repeated sexually harassing behaviors rather than one single incident. Rosenthal, Smidt, and Freyd's 2016 study of graduate students, in which 38 percent of women had encountered sexual harassment from faculty/staff and 58 percent had faced sexual harassment from students, only a small fraction (one-third or less) of these women described their harassment experience as being limited to a single incident. This confirms earlier research using data from the 1987 USMSPB survey, in which researchers found that “75 percent of those experiencing sexual teasing and jokes reported that it was not a one-time occurrence, and 54 percent of those pressured for sexual favors reported that it had occurred more than once ( USMSPB 1988 ). For most women, the harassment lasted more than a week, and often as long as 6 months” ( Schneider, Swan, and Fitzgerald 1997 , 402).

Sexual Harassment Among Women of Color and Sexual- and Gender-Minority Women

What is known about women's experiences is that those who have multiple marginalities—for instance women of color and sexual- and gender-minority women—experience certain kinds of harassment at greater rates than other women (e.g., Buchanan, Settles, and Woods 2008 ; Clancy et al. 2017 ; Cortina 2004 ; Cortina et al. 1998 ; Konik and Cortina 2008 ; Rabelo and Cortina 2014 ). Additionally, the cultural context in which people from different racial and ethnic backgrounds operate, as well as when they are numerically less represented in a workplace, can have effects on how they experience sexual harassment ( Cortina et al. 2002 ; Welsh et al. 2006 ). Thus, there is a wide spectrum of vulnerabilities, experiences, and consequences for women of color and gender minorities who are sexually harassed in the workplace.

As a field of study and as an analytical lens, intersectionality provides a framework to make visible the mutually constitutive relationship among race, ethnicity, sexuality, class, and other social positions that affect targets' experiences of harassment ( Collins 2015 ). It is rooted in Black feminism and Critical Race Theory and also makes visible intersecting axes of oppression that contribute to power hierarchies within a social structure related to race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, and class. Addressing the legacy of exclusions of black women, legal scholar Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw used the concept of intersectionality to highlight the intersection of race and gender discrimination and how treating them as exclusive, and not intertwined, rendered the discrimination and multiple marginalities faced by black women invisible to antidiscrimination law ( Crenshaw 1989 , 1991 ). More recently, Crenshaw described intersectionality as a work in progress to denote the movement in and broadening of its use across disciplines and to a wider range of social locations ( Carbado 2013 ; Crenshaw 2014 ).

Some scholars have applied an intersectional lens to examine the sexual harassment experiences of women of color, though research in this area is still very limited. It is important to prioritize the study of sexual harassment among noncisgender (cisgender means feeling aligned with the gender you were assigned at birth), nonstraight, nonwhite women when considering the impact of sexual harassment within an organization. Recent research that has begun to look at sexual harassment through the lens of intersectionality reveals how the experiences of women of color compare with that of white women, white men, and men of color. This research demonstrates that women of color and sexual- and gender-minority women sometimes experience sexual harassment differently from other populations. Women of color often experience sexual harassment as a manifestation of both gender and race discrimination ( Cortina et al. 2002 ; Murrell 1996 ), which combined can lead to higher rates of overall harassment ( Berdahl and Moore 2006 ; Woods, Buchanan, and Settles 2009 ).

The RTI International interviews 11 were able to glean complexities of intersectionality and sexually harassing behavior. Respondents noted that the issues of sexual- and gender-based harassment are often overpowered by how other issues such as race and sexual orientation intersect with their lived experience as women. These women noted an inability to disentangle discrimination and biases as stemming either from gender or their intersecting identities ( RTI 2018 ).

And then there's a lot of fairly overt transphobia in my institution, I think. And I don't really know what to make of it. But there's sort of . . . traditional old Southern set of gendered expectations and norms that if you don't fit them, it's pretty clear what people think, and they don't have to say a lot about it for you to know, you know what I mean? ( Nontenure-track faculty member in nursing ) What I've concluded is that [much] of my push towards and tenacity around equality and equity actually lands on race. I think part of that is because I've been more affronted by my race than my gender, at least more overtly. Meaning, I've had people say to my face I don't want to be taking care of that black person, oh, you speak articulate for a black person. These micro-aggressions that go out there and statements and these innuendos. ( Nontenure-track faculty member in medicine )

These studies demonstrate that an individual's identity can affect how sexual harassment is perpetrated.

Likewise, lesbian, gay, and bisexual women encounter forms of harassment that reflect a combination of sexism and heterosexism ( Konik and Cortina 2008 ; Rabelo and Cortina 2014 ). Nonbinary individuals, on the other hand, must negotiate their identities within the constructs of the gender binary that is still prevalent today ( Dietert and Dentice 2009 ). A study by Irwin (2002) examined workplace discrimination in the education sector in Australia among gay men, lesbians, and transgender individuals. Irwin found that greater than 60 percent of teachers, academics, and educators who identified as lesbian, gay, or transgender have experienced homophobic behavior and/or harassment, and have been discriminated against in the workplace. The study also found that 16 percent of the individuals who identified as lesbian, gay, or transgender have been sexually harassed, and one participant was sexually assaulted.

The research on sexual minorities has shown that this population experiences more sexual harassment than heterosexual individuals. In a study of 629 employees in higher education, nearly 76.9 percent of sexual minorities (of both genders) experienced gender harassment, whereas only 30 percent of heterosexuals (of both genders) experienced gender harassment ( Konik and Cortina 2008 ). This trend continued for the other forms of sexual harassment (unwanted sexual attention and sexual coercion): 39.7 percent of sexual minorities experienced these types, whereas only 15.5 percent of heterosexuals experienced these types. In another study the prevalence and impact of heterosexist harassment, which is insensitive verbal and symbolic (but nonassaultive) behaviors that convey animosity toward nonheterosexuality, was examined among students. The study specifically looked at how experiences of this type of harassment affected sexual minorities and heterosexuals differently and found that sexual minorities were more likely to experience heterosexist harassment than heterosexuals (58 percent and 39 percent, respectively), and when sexual minorities experienced the harassment, they were equally likely to experience it directed at them as in an ambient form (53 percent and 47 percent, respectively) ( Silverschanz et al. 2008 ).

Characteristics of Sexually Harassing Environments

By far, the greatest predictors of the occurrence of sexual harassment are organizational. Individual-level factors (e.g., sexist attitudes, beliefs that rationalize or justify harassment, etc.) that might make someone decide to harass a work colleague, student, or peer are surely important. However, a person that has proclivities for sexual harassment will have those behaviors greatly inhibited when exposed to role models who behave in a professional way as compared with role models who behave in a harassing way, or when in an environment that does not support harassing behaviors and/or has strong consequences for these behaviors. Thus, this section considers some of the organizational and environmental variables that increase the risk of sexual harassment perpetration.

Women working in environments where men outnumber women, leadership is male-dominated, and/or jobs or occupations are considered atypical for women experience more frequent incidents of sexual harassment ( USMSPB 1995 ; Fitzgerald et al. 1997 ; Berdahl 2007b ; Willness, Steel, and Lee 2007 ; Schneider, Pryor, and Fitzgerald 2011 ). In particular, the more male-dominated the work environment, the more women experience the gender harassment form of sexual harassment. For example, in one study looking at the effect of workplace gender balance, the researchers analyzed data from women employees of the federal courts. When comparing women who work in gender-balanced workgroups (i.e., equal numbers of men and women in the workgroup) with those who work with almost all men, the researchers reported women in the latter category were 1.68 times more likely to encounter gender harassment ( Kabat-Farr and Cortina 2014 ).

The historical and cultural context of a work or education environment is of high relevance to the study of sexual harassment as well, since environments that are no longer male dominated in gender ratio may still be male dominated in their work practices, culture, or behavioral expectations.

The perceived absence of organizational sanctions increases the risk of sexual harassment perpetration. Perceptions of organizational tolerance for sexual harassment (also referred to as organizational climate for sexual harassment), are broken down into three categories: (1) the perceived risk to targets for complaining, (2) a perceived lack of sanctions against offenders, and (3) the perception that one's complaints will not be taken seriously ( Hulin, Fitzgerald, and Drasgow 1996 ). Research has shown that perceptions of an organization's tolerance for all three forms of sexually harassing behavior are significantly related to both direct and ambient sexual harassment. In environments that are perceived as more tolerant or permissive of sexual harassment, women are more likely to be directly harassed ( Fitzgerald et al. 1997 ; Williams, Fitzgerald, and Drasgow 1999 ) and to witness harassment of others ( Glomb et al. 1997 ). In fact, one meta-analysis that combined data from 41 studies with a total sample size of nearly 70,000 respondents found perception of organizational tolerance to be the most potent predictor of sexual harassment in work organizations ( Willness, Steel, and Lee 2007 ). In a recent national survey of 615 working men ( Patel, Griggs, and Miller 2017 ), sexually harassing behavior was more commonly reported “among men who say their company does not have guidelines against harassment, hotlines to report it or punishment for perpetrators, or who say their managers don't care.”

Social situations in which sexist views and sexually harassing behavior are modeled can enable, facilitate, or even encourage sexually harassing behaviors, while, conversely, positive role models can inhibit sexually harassing behavior ( Dekker and Barling 1998 ; Perry, Schmidtke, and Kulik 1998 ; Pryor, LaVite, and Stoller 1993 ). In one study, college men who had professed a willingness to sexually coerce were found to be more likely to sexually exploit a female trainee when they were exposed to an authority figure who acted in a sexually exploitive way ( Pryor, LaVite, and Stoller 1993 ). Hitlan and colleagues (2009) found that viewing a sexist film enhanced the tendency among the less sexist men to perform acts of gender harassment. In another experiment, men who viewed sexist TV clips were more likely to send women unsolicited sexist jokes and more likely to profess a willingness to engage in sexual coercion than men who watched programs portraying young, successful women in domains such as science, culture, and business ( Maass, Cadinu, and Galdi 2013 ). Conversely, experiments show that sexual harassment is less likely to occur if those behaviors are not accepted by authority figures ( Pryor, LaVite, and Stoller 1993 ). So, while social situations do not necessarily function as triggers for existing predilections to sexually harass, they can act as a force encouraging or discouraging men to sexually harass, demonstrating the power of practiced social norms (e.g., the social norms communicated by the actions of the people in an environment rather than their words or the words from official policy for an organization).

Other factors that research suggests increase the chances of sexual harassment perpetration are significant power differentials within hierarchical organizations and organizational tolerance of alcohol use. Hierarchical work environments like the military, where there is a large power differential between organizational levels and an expectation is not to question those higher up, tend to have higher rates of sexual harassment than organizations that have less power differential between the organizational levels, like the private sector and government ( Ilies et al. 2003 ; Schneider, Pryor, and Fitzgerald 2011 ). Environments that allow drinking during work breaks and have permissive norms related to drinking are positively associated with higher levels of gender harassment of women ( Bacharach, Bamberger, and McKinney 2007 ). Culturally, these are, again, patterns more common in currently or historically male-dominated workplaces.

• FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Sexual harassment is a form of discrimination that consists of three types of harassing behavior: (1) gender harassment (verbal and nonverbal behaviors that convey hostility, objectification, exclusion, or second-class status about members of one gender); (2) unwanted sexual attention (unwelcome verbal or physical sexual advances, which can include assault); and (3) sexual coercion (when favorable professional or educational treatment is conditioned on sexual activity). The distinctions between the types of harassment are important, particularly because many people do not realize that gender harassment is a form of sexual harassment.

Sexually harassing behavior can be either direct (targeted at an individual) or ambient (a general level of sexual harassment in an environment) and is harmful in both cases. It is considered illegal when it creates a hostile environment (gender harassment or unwanted sexual attention that is “severe or pervasive” enough to alter the conditions of employment, interfere with one's work performance, or impede one's ability to get an education) or when it is quid pro quo sexual harassment (when favorable professional or educational treatment is conditioned on sexual activity).

There are reliable scientific methods for determining the prevalence of sexual harassment. To measure the incidence of sexual harassment, surveys should follow the best practices that have emerged from the science of sexual harassment. This includes use of the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire, the most widely used and well-validated instrument available for measuring sexual harassment; assessment of specific behaviors without requiring the respondent to label the behaviors “sexual harassment”; focus on first-hand experience or observation of behavior (rather than rumor or hearsay); and focus on the recent past (1–2 years, to avoid problems of memory decay). Relying on the number of official reports of sexual harassment made to an organization is not an accurate method for determining the prevalence.

Some surveys underreport the incidence of sexual harassment because they have not followed standard and valid practices for survey research and sexual harassment research.

While properly conducted surveys are the best methods for estimating the prevalence of sexual harassment, other salient aspects of sexual harassment and its consequences can be examined using other research methods , such as behavioral laboratory experiments, interviews, case studies, ethnographies, and legal research. Such studies can provide information about the presence and nature of sexually harassing behavior in an organization, how it develops and continues (and influences the organizational climate), and how it attenuates or amplifies outcomes from sexual harassment.

Sexual harassment remains a persistent problem in the workplace at large. Across workplaces, five common characteristics emerge:

Women experience sexual harassment more often than men do.

Gender harassment (e.g., behaviors that communicate that women do not belong or do not merit respect) is by far the most common type of sexual harassment. When an environment is pervaded by gender harassment, unwanted sexual attention and sexual coercion become more likely to occur—in part because unwanted sexual attention and sexual coercion are almost never experienced by women without simultaneously experiencing gender harassment.

Men are more likely than women to commit sexual harassment.

Coworkers and peers more often commit sexual harassment than do superiors.

Sexually harassing behaviors are not typically isolated incidents; rather, they are a series or pattern of sometimes escalating incidents and behaviors.

Research that does not include the study of women of color and sexual- and gender-minority women presents an incomplete picture of women's experiences of sexual harassment. The preliminary research on the experiences of women of color, and sexual- and gender-minority women reveals that their experiences of sexual harassment can differ from the larger population of cisgender, straight, white women.

Women of color experience more harassment (sexual, racial/ethnic, or combination of the two) than white women, white men, and men of color do. Women of color often experience sexual harassment that includes racial harassment.

Sexual- and gender-minority people experience more sexual harassment than heterosexual women do.

The two characteristics of environments most associated with higher rates of sexual harassment are (a) male-dominated gender ratios and leadership and (b) an organizational climate that communicates tolerance of sexual harassment (e.g., leadership that fails to take complaints seriously, fails to sanction perpetrators, or fails to protect complainants from retaliation).

Organizational climate is, by far, the greatest predictor of the occurrence of sexual harassment, and ameliorating it can prevent people from sexually harassing others. A person more likely to engage in harassing behaviors is significantly less likely to do so in an environment that does not support harassing behaviors and/or has strong, clear, transparent consequences for these behaviors.

Barnes v. Costle , 561 F.2d 983, 987 (D.C. Cir. 1977).

Williams v. Saxbe , 413 F. Supp. 654 D.D.C. (1976).

Bundy v. Jackson , 641 F.2d 934 (D.C. Cir. 1981).

Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson , 477 U.S. 57 (1986).

The empirical record on sexual harassment goes back over 30 years, and important studies were conducted in that first decade. Members of this committee thought carefully about whether to cite “older” articles (e.g., from the 1980s). We opted to retain those references when, in our expert opinion, their methods were rigorous and their conclusions would still apply in today's world.

Nonprobability samples are samples that are not representative of the whole population and are often used when a defined population is not possible to specify or when it is not necessary to have a representative dataset to achieve the goals of the research. These samples can include convenience samples and snowball samples.

The 1980 survey used 6 forms of “unwanted, uninvited sexual harassment,” the 1987 survey used 7 (adding rape and sexual assault), the 1994 survey used 8 (adding rape and stalking), and the 2016 survey used 12 forms (adding gender harassment types). The original six categories remained consistent throughout the years.

After the 2012 survey, the military asked the RAND Corporation to conduct a new survey revising the methodology as needed. The result was a significant change in how sexual harassment was defined in the analysis, and thus the prevalence numbers cannot easily be compared with the previous series of surveys. Whereas previous surveys assessed the prevalence of sexually harassing behaviors, the RAND survey used behavior-based questions to determine the prevalence rate of legally defined sexual harassment, meaning that they asked questions and grouped results based on hostile work environment and quid pro quo harassment. While quid pro quo harassment maps cleanly to sexual coercion, hostile work environment requires the condition that the sexually harassing behaviors (such as gender harassment and unwanted sexual attention) be considered by the respondent to be pervasive or severe—essentially requiring a frequency or severity assessment that had not been previously used. With this much narrower definition of “what counts” as harassing behavior, the 2016 survey yielded a lower overall rate of sexual harassment for women over a 12-month time period: 21.4 percent ( RAND 2016 ).

See, for example, https://www ​.nytimes.com ​/2017/10/05/us/harvey-weinstein-harassment-allegations ​.html?rref=collection ​%2Fbyline ​%2Fjodi-kantor ; https://www ​.nytimes.com ​/2017/10/10/us/gwyneth-paltrow-angelina-jolie-harvey-weinstein ​.html?rref=collection ​%2Fbyline%2Fjodi-kantor&action ​=click&contentCollection ​=undefined&region ​=stream&module ​=stream_unit&version ​=latest&contentPlacement ​=10&pgtype=collection ; https://www ​.buzzfeed ​.com/azeenghorayshi/geoff-marcy-at-sfsu?utm_term= ​.phP5anr0n#.kprpq6Gj6 ; https://www ​.buzzfeed ​.com/azeenghorayshi/ott-harassment-investigation?utm_term= ​.vi3ByvlNv#.wm83947r4 ; and https://www ​.reuters.com ​/article/us-foxnews-lawsuit ​/ex-fox-news-anchor-accuses-former-boss-ailes-of-sexual-harassment-idUSKCN0ZM21I .

One obvious factor that contributes to this difference is that there are most often more coworkers or peers than there are superiors.

This research was commissioned by the committee and the full report on this research is available in Appendix C .

• Cite this Page National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Policy and Global Affairs; Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine; Committee on the Impacts of Sexual Harassment in Academia; Benya FF, Widnall SE, Johnson PA, editors. Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2018 Jun 12. 2, Sexual Harassment Research.
• PDF version of this title (4.5M)

In this Page

Other titles in this collection.

• The National Academies Collection: Reports funded by National Institutes of Health

Recent Activity

• Sexual Harassment Research - Sexual Harassment of Women Sexual Harassment Research - Sexual Harassment of Women

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

• Dissertation Help Custom Writing Service
• Essay Writing: How to Write an Essay
• Application Paper
• Coursework Writing Service that You Will Like
• Research Proposal Writing Service
• How it Works

Sexual Harassment

• Social Sciences

Sexual harassment is an unwelcome sexual behavior, which mainly makes the person affected feel offended, intimidated or humiliated. Sexual harassment is verbal, physical or written. The harassment is not always sexual in nature but can also be in the form of remarks or comments. If one makes an offensive comment about women in general, it is considered as harassment. The harasser can be of opposite sex or similar sex. The law does not forbid teasing and flirting, but when it becomes severe and frequent to an extent of creating a hostile working environment for the victim, then it is considered as harassment. The harasser can be a supervisor, co-worker, client, customer or a non-employee (Korgen, Korgen & Giraffe, 2015). Sexual harassment can be directed to both men and women. This paper focuses on sexual harassment directed at women, which are most common cases. Sexual harassment is a social and workplace problem.

A study done by Schneider et al. (1997) revealed that sexual harassment even at low frequency leads to significant negative effects. It influences negatively on the women psychological wellbeing and particularly on the work behaviors and job attitudes. In the study, women who had been sexually harassed reported the worst job-related outcomes as well as psychological outcomes. Those who had not been sexually harassed also reported negative outcomes. This is because they are aware of the situation they are exposed to.

Sexual harassment makes the working environment hostile. A hostile working environment makes an employee uncomfortable.  Most people tend to understate the effects of sexual harassment. Sexual harassment can cause serious health issues. It affects the victims well being by interfering with the emotional well-being leading to low self-esteem and compromising personal relationships (Schneider et al., 1997). It can also cause anxiety and stress. The major problem is that in most cases, a senior employee to the victim perpetrates sexual harassment in the workplace. In such a case, the victim has other factors to consider rather than reporting the case. The victim can be fired or even prosecuted given that it is hard to prove sexual harassment. Most of the victims opt to stay quiet leading to emotional and psychological pain.

Emotional health is closely related to physical health. When the victim is emotionally unhealthy, it leads to physical health cases in most of the cases. These include appetite loss, weight fluctuations, headaches and sleep disturbances. When a harassed employee reports a case with no evidence, it can be interpreted as witch-hunt on fellow employees. Non-sexual harassment, for example, is hard to prove in which case a victim can be fired. Being fired adds to the problem of harassment and the victim end up developing a psychological problem.

The documentary “The Invisible War” investigates the sexual harassment in the United States Army. It portrays the kind of problem that exists when a junior employee reports sexual harassment perpetrated by a senior. It is possible that the employee is reporting to the same person who harassed her. In the documentary, most of the victims have developed psychological problems. Some of the women interviewed in the documentary also have serious physical injuries.

Though sexual harassment in the workplace is prohibited, women are still sexually harassed in the workplace. This behavior impacts negatively even on the company or enterprise in that a harassed employee will have a negative attitude towards work. This in turn will lower the employee’s productivity. In addition, most organizations depend on time for efficiency and good results. It will be hard for a sexually harassed employee to engage with other employees due to low self-esteem and fear.

Bowling & Beehr (2006) in their article “Workplace Harassment From the Victim’s Perspective” argue that there are three direct causes of workplace harassment. These include the work environment characteristic, the victim, and the perpetrator. It is possible for the victim to blame both of the other causes of the organization. First, the organization can be responsible for the harassment given that the perpetrator is an employee of the organization. In addition, the culture of the organization can directly or indirectly encourage harassment. Bowling & Beehr (2006) continue to argue that the perpetrators of workplace harassment may be stressed. Being exposed to work stress can lead to the production of negative behavioral and emotional responses that can ultimately lead to victimization. The perpetrators of work-based harassment might be coping with work-based stress. High level of stressors can lead the perpetrators to engage in harassment.

Personal characteristics can help identify a perpetrator of work-based harassment. Research indicates that perpetrators are emotionally reactive, rebellious, cynical and have a low tolerance and hierarchal position. Greenberg and Barling (as cited in Bowling & Beehr, 2006) found that there is a positive correlation between aggression towards supervisors, co-workers, subordinates. When the perpetrators characteristics are partially responsible for the harassment, then the victim can blame either the perpetrator or the organization.

Bowling & Beehr (2006) concluded that the characteristics of the work environment could contribute to harassment. When employees are working in a stressful environment, they may be victims of harassment since the stressors in the workplace produce behaviors that may encourage others to victimize them. It is important for the employer to inspect regularly the working environment to try to recognize any stressors available.

Berdahl, (2007) did a study to test two competing views about sexual harassment. The first view was that sexual harassment is motivated by sexual desires thus directed to women who meet feminine ideals while the other one is that sexual harassment is motivated by the desire to punish women who violate feminine ideals. Berdahl indicates that, originally, sexual harassment was a male boss victimizing a female subordinate. Berdahl concluded that women who violate feminine ideals were most likely to be sexually harassed in the workplace. Women in male-dominated jobs have a high likely hood of being sexually harassed. Sexual harassment is thus a form of sex discrimination that keeps both the sexes unequal and separate.

Sexual harassment positive support using various social controls

Sexual harassment can be prevented by use of various social controls. One major way to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace is by generating and implementing strict organizational policies against the behavior. One major issue that should be addressed is bureaucracy. When an employee is expected to report everything to the immediate boss, she will not report a sexual harassment case to the person who committed it. This is the major reason most of the victims never report harassment. As mentioned earlier, sexual harassment is hard to prove. When an employee reports a sexual harassment case to the senior management, she will automatically be asked to produce evidence.  It is hard to determine these cases given that there is no witness. When the victim and the harasser lay down their arguments, it is likely that the case will be dismissed for lack of evidence.

The victim will be humiliated. In extreme cases such as in the documentary mentioned above, the victims are fired with no benefits.

To avoid these cases, organizations should have strict policies that outline the reporting and handling of sexual harassment cases. There should be an independent body or committee to handle sexual harassment cases. This way, the cases will be handled without no prejudice and discrimination. Riger (1991) in a study investigating the dilemma in sexual harassment policies noticed that many women do not report sexual harassment cases. This is because the sexual harassment policies are gender biased, and women are discouraged from using them.  Though such policies are drafted in gender-neutral language, they are experienced different due to the gender difference in sexual harassment perception. Sexual harassment inflicts on an individual rights and freedoms protected by the constitution. In my view, the management should not handle sexual harassment cases in the workplace. The cases should be handled by the judicial system. The management might favor any of the involved parties for various reasons, but the judicial system will be independent.

Another way to control sexual harassment is by educating the employees. Sexual harassment is both physical and non-physical. Employees should be fully aware of what entails as sexual harassment as per the organizations policies (Korgen, Korgen & Giraffe, 2015). A frequent simple tease can lead to sexual harassment, and if the employee is already aware of the situation, she can be able to prevent herself early enough.

Women are also argued to encourage sexual harassment. Male employees may interpret female employees dressing wrongly. Organizations should implement a social change where people dress appropriately. In addition, when employees attend corporate functions, they should behave responsibly. Taking of alcohol in such functions should be controlled since it might lead to sexual harassment. The bottom line is that all employees should be responsible and always consider the effects of their actions on other employees. Some women provoke male employees into sexually harassing them knowingly or unknowingly.

Sexual harassment is a social problem in this century. Not only does it happen in the workplaces but other social facilities. It is the responsibility of the employers to maintain a free and comfortable workplace. I would recommend that employers adopt a strict and clear policy about sexual harassment.  The policy should elaborate on what sexual harassment entails. The policy should also define in clear terms the procedure to be used when filing for sexual harassment complains. Any sexual harassment complaints should be thoroughly investigated and any wrongdoer punished severely. This will encourage other victims to report (Fitzgerald, Swan & Fischer, 1995).  The policy should also emphasize that any retaliation against those who file complaints will not and will never be tolerated.

Employees are different. There are those who will readily file complaints and those who will fear victimization or retaliation. Due to this, I would recommend that the employer monitors the workplace. The employer should periodically talk about the work environment with the employees. The employees should be involved in making decisions that affect their work environment. This way the employer will create a good working relationship with the employees.  However, there are cases where the employer perpetrates the sexual harassment. This means the victim cannot report to the same employer (Korgen, Korgen & Giraffe, 2015).  In such a case, the Government should specify the procedures to be followed while filing a sexual harassment through the judiciary system. In addition, if any victim feels that the case was not well handled by the employer, she should forward the complain to the judicial system.

A big problem with the sexual harassment is the lack of evidence. Employers should install systems that monitor emails and communications in the workplace and scan for any sexual harassment.  Video cameras and sound recorders should be placed in strategic places inside the working premises to be able to monitor any sexual harassment.

Potential social and economic benefits   

Preventing and controlling sexual harassment in the workplace can have both social and economic benefits. First, research has proven that sexual harassment can cause psychological problems. If prevented, cases of psychological problems can be minimized. This is a benefit not only to the society but also to the organization. A sexually harassed employee will not be able to concentrate on their work. This, in turn, lowers their productivity. Hard the sexual harassment been prevented, the employee would still be productive. The economy depends largely on the organizations for its growth. When such organizations are performing poorly, the economy, in general, is performing badly. The working environment should be conducive so as to allow all employees be productive.

As Berdahl, (2007) indicates, women in male-dominated jobs have a high likely hood of being sexually harassed. This can keep the women away from such jobs and in turn, render them jobless. The unemployment rate is a major cause of economic failure. When people are unemployed, they do not contribute to the growth of the economy. In addition, when unemployment rates are high social issues such as poverty, homelessness kicks in. This forces the government to spend a lot of money in trying to solve such issues.

Riger (1991) concluded that many women do not report sexual harassment cases due to gender bias in the sexual harassment policies. This means many victims leave with the guilt inside them. Such guilt is very dangerous to those people living close to the victim. The victim can develop psychological problems or become physically violent. Preventing sexual harassment can help the society solve or evade such issues. In addition, for the victims who report the cases, a lot of time is spent investigating the cases. In most cases, the victim and the perpetrator are sent home on compulsory and unpaid leave. This creates financial problems for the victim. Issues like these have been seen to cause other family problems for the married women. All these problems could be prevented if sexual harassment is prevented.

Sexual harassment is a problem in both the society and the workplace. This is because, when it happens to the workplace, the consequences are felt by both the organization and the society. Issues such as loss of employment, unpaid leave, family problems, poverty and psychological problems impact more on the society.

Organizations should have gender-sensitive sexual harassment policies that are easy to follow. Victims will see the employer as partly responsible for their victimization. Thus, the employers should be strict in managing the workplace environment secure and free from sexual harassment victimization. In cases where the victims are afraid to report a claim with the organization management, legal channels through the judiciary system are available for use.

Berdahl, J. L. (2007). The sexual harassment of uppity women. Journal of Applied Psychology , 92 (2), 425.

Bowling, N. A., & Beehr, T. A. (2006). Workplace harassment from the victim’s perspective: a theoretical model and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology , 91 (5), 998.

Fitzgerald, L. F., Swan, S., & Fischer, K. (1995). Why didn’t she just report him? The psychological and legal implications of women’s responses to sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues , 51 (1), 117-138.

Korgen, K. O., Korgen, J. O., & Giraffe, V. (2015). Social issues in the workplace (2nd ed.) [Electronic version]. Retrieved from  https://content.ashford.edu/

Riger, S. (1991). Gender dilemmas in sexual harassment policies and procedures. American Psychologist , 46 (5), 497.

Schneider, K. T., Swan, S., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1997). Job-related and psychological effects of sexual harassment in the workplace: empirical evidence from two organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology , 82 (3), 401.

Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay ?

‘Nude Images Of Me Were Spread Online As A Young Teen. Now I’m Fighting To Protect Other Survivors.’

How one survivor of Image-Based Sexual Abuse is calling for radical change.

Leah Juliett is an Image Based Sexual Abuse (IBSA) expert and survivor, activist, and founder of the March Against Revenge Porn .

When I was a young teen, a boy I knew pressured me to send nudes over Facebook Messenger. Over a decade later, I still have all of the messages. He would compliment my body and show interest in me before asking for intimate photos. And when I denied him, he would rescind his interest. I deeply wanted to be loved and to be seen. For years, I had a very negative relationship with my body and self-image. Being “seen” by this boy was of value to me.

Eventually, after a year of being pressured, I sent him the four photos he requested. My breasts, my face—all of me was exposed. I made him promise he would never share them. He laughed at me, like it was silly that I would think he would violate my privacy and my consent. But that’s exactly what he did.

I will never know the exact thing that triggered him (I’ve never been able to speak to him about it, nor does any excuse justify his abuse), but around the same time I started to come out as queer, he told me that he was going to ruin my life. I didn’t know what that meant at the time, and I wasn’t able to understand the gravity of the situation in the way that I do now. He ended up sharing my nude images on Facebook Messenger to a group of boys from our town. They spread through my high school like wildfire. They were disseminated throughout my city. And I thought: This is as bad as it’s going to get—kids in high school looking at me like they’d seen me naked . But it got worse.

The photos were posted on an international image board called Anon-IB, where my name, age, town, face, and body were disseminated and accessible for well over five years. They’re likely still there today.

I stayed silent for a really long time after this happened. My abuser knew where I lived. He knew my little sister. He knew where I went to school. I knew that if I tried to speak out against him, I would be blamed and slut-shamed by my community. I felt like he owned me, my dignity and my safety. I was also very, very scared that I would be arrested. (In Connecticut, we didn’t have legislation that protected survivors of image-based sexual violence from also being held accountable for sharing the photos.)

I did my best to make myself as invisible as possible. I was afraid that if I didn’t make myself absolutely small and silent, something worse would happen, that more people would find out, that the photos would get posted in other places. When I went to college, I moved out of my small hometown and began depending on self-harm and alcohol to heal my pain. During this time, at 19 years old, I had what Dr. Spring Cooper, a survivor and researcher in this field, calls a “f*ck it” moment. A moment where I was shaken awake.

I had opened up Facebook on my laptop and saw a news article showing a mug shot of the man who had abused me as a teenager. It was a visceral moment, seeing his mug shot staring back at me. It’s burned into my brain. And I said, “Okay, this man is either going to kill me because I am driving myself to death the way that I’m handling the trauma of this situation, or I’m going to act.” In that moment, I decided to save my life, and I decided to act.

For the past decade, I’ve been healing the parts of me that are cracked and broken inside as a result of this abuse and exploitation. And now, at 27, I am in a place where—despite my cracks and despite my brokenness and despite the trauma that lives in me—I am strong enough to advocate against the people, the structures, the institutions that allowed abuse like mine to happen. Now, I’m focused on accountability for abusers.

I work with two coalitions that fight online image-based sexual violence and child sexual abuse material on the Internet, and we’re working to hold tech companies and abusers accountable.

During the Senate Judiciary hearing in January, I was in the room listening to top tech CEOs testify in front of Congress. I was joined by fellow survivors, and I watched parents and families of children who’ve died because of sextortion via this technology speak. There were stories of young people who bought fentanyl-laced pills on Snapchat, of young men who took their own lives after being sextorted. And it made me realize that this abuse and violence made possible through our tech and social media is impacting so many of us in so many unique ways.

I was abused in an Internet and social media landscape that looked a lot different than it does now. There were no precautions or tools to help protect and prevent this type of abuse on platforms. Now, I feel lucky to live in a moment where my voice has value and the five years I suffered in silence are not in vain.

But passing federal legislation is deeply important. We don’t have laws criminalizing nonconsensual image sharing in all 50 states. (It’s a misdemeanor in some, and a felony in a few others.) If I had the power to change things right now, I’d immediately pass the suite of bills proposed to protect children and prevent their online abuse:

• The EARN IT Act , which allows websites to remove user-posted content deemed inappropriate and removes blanket immunity for violations of laws related to online child sexual abuse material (CSAM)
• The SHIELD Act , which makes it a criminal offense to distribute intimate visual depictions
• Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), which would protect children online by enabling stronger privacy settings; making it easier to report harmful behavior; mitigating the proliferation of content that promotes eating disorders, substance abuse, CSA, and suicidal ideation; and requiring independent audits of how social media platforms are doing

When I started talking about this 10 years ago, nobody wanted to hear me. Nobody wanted to publish my story. Attorneys didn’t want to work with me because I was under 18 when the incident occurred. Everybody blamed me and nobody cared. But now, we’re at an inflection point. I’ve been begging everyone to listen to me on this issue for a decade, and people finally seem to be waking up. During the State of the Union, President Biden said it was time to pass legislation to protect children online. My dad texted me: “I heard that and I immediately thought of you.”

If I could tell every young person one thing, it would be to instill in their brains that regardless of what happens to you, that abuse is never your fault. And if it takes you two days or two years, five months or five years to say what happened to you, there will always be someone to listen. There is a community of survivors, experts, and allies in this space who are ready to support and affirm you. You don’t have to just survive. You deserve to live out loud.

A Guide to King Charles III's Nieces and Nephews

Meet Simone Biles' Supportive Parents

40 Camping Essentials For Your Next Adventure

'Bachelorette' Jenn Tran S21: Cast, Release Date

Everything to Know About Jasmine Paolini’s Parents

8 Best Silk Pillowcases, Tested By Skin Experts

Why Meghan and Harry Kept Lili’s Birthday Private

Wait, What's Eldest Daughter Syndrome?

4 Best Heating Pads To Soothe Sore Muscles, Tested

Where Is DCC's Sophy Laufer Now?

Where Is DCC Caroline Sundvold Now?

Sexual Harassment and Discrimination in the Workplace Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

The ways in which an organization responds to claims of sexual harassment and pervasive discrimination based on gender are fundamental for repairing a damaged reputation and preventing similar cases from occurring in the future. Due to the high number of court cases that involve companies responding to charges of discrimination and sexual harassment, it is essential to analyze such cases for organizational managers to understand how they can avoid them in the future. In this paper, the case chosen for analysis involves a South-Dakota social services organization serving low-income individuals across the state. As a result of the lawsuit, the organization, Rural Office of Community Services Inc., will pay monetary relief while having to resolve further reputational problems and develop ideas and approaches for supporting diversity and inclusivity.

The case report states that the organization was to pay $320,000 in monetary relief to a class of employees who were affected by sexual harassment and discrimination based on gender. The workers filed a charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), alleging that Rural Office of Community Services Inc. discriminated against them because of their sex, subjecting them to sexual harassment and retaliating against specific workers complaining to terminate them (“South Dakota Social Agency Fined $320K,” 2022). In the lawsuit, the EEOC conducted an investigation into the conduct, finding that the organization’s executive director harassed female employees regardless of the complaints made to the management and the board of directors. Significantly, it was determined that the harassment lasted over several years, violating the provisions of the Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“South Dakota Social Agency Fined $320K,” 2022). The provisions ban discrimination on the basis of sex and retaliation against persons who complain about such conduct. The violation of the law shows the organizations’ disregard for equal rights principles for which Americans have fought.

After researching and reviewing the value statement of Rural Office of Community Services Inc., no mention of diversity and inclusion is present. This presents a reputational problem for the organization because there is a lack of consideration for how the lack of diversity in the workplace benefits the organization. The first strategy that the organization can implement for embedding diversity and inclusion is to implement diversity training in the workplace so that the commitment to the principles is visible through action and not just communicated. This strategy entails showing what diversity and inclusion mean for the organization and how they are promoted in the everyday work context (Heaslip, 2020). The second recommendation that the company should implement is to ensure that the value statement serves a purpose and there are actionable aspects that can be included. For example, the contents may include how many diverse low-income families were served, whether there are diverse individuals in leadership positions, or what inclusion goals the organization pursues for the future.

Prior to implementing any procedures for compliance with the issue related to the lawsuit, it is necessary that the Rural Office of Community Services Inc. follows federal anti-discrimination laws, including the Title VII of the Civil rights Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and several others. The first important strategy for the organization is to establish a strongly-worded zero-tolerance policy for gender discrimination and sexual harassment. The policy should be reinforced after consistent employee and manager training has been implemented, with their conduct being subjected to reviews if necessary. The second strategy entails holding managers accountable through reporting requirements summarizing specific efforts to advance gender equality and prevent discrimination based on sex. When clear reporting channels are established, it will become easier to communicate any cases showing a lack of adherence to the zero-tolerance policy.

Within a larger social context, the compliance issue that was revealed in the case concerning the organization illustrates the pervasive impact of patriarchal values on society and workplaces in particular. Women remain discriminated against in the workplace because they are perceived as less qualified or capable, while sexual harassment occurs when perpetrators are certain that their victims can do nothing to protect themselves or make a report (Folke & Rickne, 2022). Until society becomes more inclusive and abandons the stereotypical gender roles, it is likely that women will remain discriminated against and harassed in the workplace, which is an unfavorable prognosis.

To conclude, the case involving the Rural Office of Community Services Inc. and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission points to the importance of practices associated with diversity and inclusion in the workplace in order to prevent sexual harassment and discrimination from occurring in the workplace setting. As the case becomes known to the public, the organization will have to deal with reputational outcomes while also showing that it can adhere to practices regarding the internal investigation of complaints. Besides, the organization will have to engage in employee and manager training, report to the EEOC regularly, as well as embed the principles of diversity and inclusion into its statement of values.

Folke, O., & Rickne, J. (2022). Sexual harassment and gender inequality in the labor market . The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 137 (4), 2163-2212. Web.

Heaslip, E. (2020). Writing a diversity and inclusion statement: How to get it right . Web.

South Dakota social agency fined $320K . (2022). Web.

• Fig Technologies Company's Organizational Culture
• Coronavirus Restrictions in China
• EEOC v. WC&M Enterprises Case
• Sears Company: Collapse and Bankruptcy
• Enron Corporation: Leadership Failure
• Milton Friedman’s Critique of CSR
• The Volkswagen Diesel Emissions Scandal Evaluation
• "Google's Switch to Android App Now…" by Khan
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, May 27). Sexual Harassment and Discrimination in the Workplace. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sexual-harassment-and-discrimination-in-the-workplace/

"Sexual Harassment and Discrimination in the Workplace." IvyPanda , 27 May 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/sexual-harassment-and-discrimination-in-the-workplace/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Sexual Harassment and Discrimination in the Workplace'. 27 May.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Sexual Harassment and Discrimination in the Workplace." May 27, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sexual-harassment-and-discrimination-in-the-workplace/.

1. IvyPanda . "Sexual Harassment and Discrimination in the Workplace." May 27, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sexual-harassment-and-discrimination-in-the-workplace/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Sexual Harassment and Discrimination in the Workplace." May 27, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sexual-harassment-and-discrimination-in-the-workplace/.

• Anti-Abortion Movement
• Supreme Court
• Project 2025
• Abortion Bans
• Violence Against Women

More Than A Magazine, A Movement

• Justice & Law
• Violence & Harassment

My Daughter Was Assaulted in a Hospital. Body Cams Could Have Brought Us Justice.

Editor’s note : This essay contains references to child abuse and sexual violence.

I knew my child was a fighter her first night home when she went wild boar on my chest to get at my breasts. Like her ancestors before her, she was a survivor. I’m glad I didn’t know then all that she would endure.

When she was 16 months old, she had a cold with a fever. The neighbor’s baby, the same age, also had the symptoms. We had all hung out during the day with us moms putting them down for naps, giving them children’s Tylenol and watching them play. 

That evening, I made the mistake of putting her in a long-sleeved onesie. Her febrile, or feverish, seizure began while I was nursing her—she was choking on my milk. I was terrified. I ran out of our apartment with her in my arms, screaming for help. She looked purple. The seizures stopped and I instinctively patted her on the back to stop the choking. One of my neighbors, a nurse, put us in the car and drove us to the emergency room. 

Once there, they gave me paperwork describing a febrile seizure. They made it clear that a febrile seizure was the result of a fever spiking and was unlikely to cause permanent damage. I was tremendously relieved. If only the danger of that evening had ended there. 

The medical staff did not want to release us until she was given a catheter in case there was a UTI. They never told me that catheters to check for UTIs can lead to UTIs or that UTIs were not commonly associated with a fever in infants . 

My daughter is remarkably strong. She kicked her legs and did assisted presses into standing from nearly birth. She was an early walker and an early talker. She was savvy for a 16-month-old, and she knew a kind and nurturing environment. The hospital room was not a nurturing nor safe environment for her that evening. 

The first round of violence included several medical personnel attempting to hold her down and insert the catheter. The catheter insertion did not go in. She used her strong legs, arms and core—her entire body—to reject what they were doing to her. She made her body completely rigid.

She was crying. I was pleading with them, Can we please not do this? But they kept at it. What was a traumatic event spiraled out of my control and into abuse. 

One male healthcare worker in particular seemed to relish in the power of being “in charge.” He and I were in a battle; the more I tried to protect my daughter from him inserting this apparatus into her urethra, the more he insisted upon doing it. He discounted the 16-month-old patient on the bed in front of him. He had all the power. 

Afterward, they told me they were unable to get a catheter, so they would wait to see if she urinated during the next hour—as if she would be able to vacate normally immediately after that violation. We were never offered the non-invasive alternative of urinating before the attempt at a forced catheter. 

She did not do what they needed her to do in that timeframe and a small group of them came back. I cried and screamed inside as my daughter was assaulted again. They held her down and forced the catheter into her. She screamed on the outside. She buckled her body. She went entirely stiff. She cried, she yelled. We cried and tried to resist. We were not successful, neither were they. They told me they had still not gotten a catheter but they had caused bleeding.

I did not know the language, “I refuse these medical services,” to intervene on behalf of my daughter. 

Six people assaulted or aided the assault on my daughter for no medical outcome. 

I attempted a police report and they told me it was a sheriff’s issue. The sheriff’s office sat with me and told me it did not count as an assault because it was at a hospital. At the hospital, I was met with a public relations person who eventually wrote me a generic letter telling me they would address it in no specific terms. I took it up with my medical provider, and they told me that it was unacceptable, but they did nothing. I tried to get lawyers to take my case and none of them returned my messages.

The ramifications have been widespread and winding. For weeks afterward, she walked around, touched her private parts and said, “Ow.” For months after the incident, she touched her private parts, which I had not seen her do previously. The distress to me as her mother, failing to protect her, caused a high level of mental health problems. Following this incident, I felt more anger and anxiety with the police, legal and medical systems. 

Studies show that young children who are abused are more likely to experience abuse throughout their life. I try not to ruminate about how this incident may continue to impact her throughout her life. Will she be susceptible to partners who overpower and dominate her? Will she have PTSD? Will she have nightmares and not know where they are coming from? Will my daughter experience lifelong problems? 

We might think this is a rare phenomenon. However, a dear friend I confided in told me it happened to her when she was a child.  

Even if she doesn’t remember it, even if we are able to recover, this disturbance caused a period of domino effects that negatively impacted our lives. 

Even if we can continue to heal, it doesn’t erase the injustice. My daughter’s first experience with penetration in her private area was by an adult male, decades older, who overpowered her and refused to listen to her. He weaponized his authority to harm and call it medically necessary. He— not us —was safe and protected. 

To be sure, there are medically necessary intrusive procedures. My father had stints in his heart and a plethora of medical interventions that could be considered highly traumatic when he had cancer. However, as an adult, he could give consent in a way my daughter could not. 

As parents, we have to make difficult decisions for our children. Sometimes they involve the healthcare system. These times are often a negotiation of instinct, knowledge and trust in our medical professionals. 

When kids go through these difficult medical procedures, staff must establish consent in a way that this hospital staff did not. We were past the emergency; her seizure was gone. It had been properly diagnosed. I provided them with information that supported this diagnosis—namely that her friend had the same symptoms, minus the seizure. 

It was late at night. She needed rest, calm and tranquility. If we had been treated with such, we could have avoided much of the negative and impactful fallout this incident set into motion. Could the hospital have moved us out of the ER and into a room to wait for her to urinate on her own? Or they could have released us to go home with instructions to come back if her symptoms worsened. We lived five minutes from the hospital. 

This team, particularly the aggressive male staff member, was able to dominate my baby through the medium of her private parts. What if he is a sexual predator? I found no recourse to report this menace of a possibility. There are no mechanisms to prevent this abuse. 

Especially when male doctors are going to be in the vicinity of female private parts, there must be consent, at all ages, at all times.   

If the ER staff wore body cams, if I had a video of that hospital room to offer as evidence of the sexual assault of a minor—a toddler—as evidence that the Hippocratic oath was breached, then I would be less likely to be seen as a mother overreacting. We would have a pathway to achieve a modicum of justice. Without it, I am just another mother of a child who can say #MeToo. 

RAINN, the nation’s largest anti-sexual violence organization, has a 24/7 hotline at 800.656.HOPE (4673) and a chatline at online.rainn.org.

Our Abortion Stories: ‘I Knew Something Was Wrong, But My Doctor Wouldn’t Listen’

‘Inverse Cowgirl’: My Life as an Intersex, Intersectional Activist in the Lone Star State

N.Y. Bill to End Statute of Limitations on Sex Crimes Could Help Survivors Seek Justice

U.S. democracy is at a dangerous inflection point—from the demise of abortion rights, to a lack of pay equity and parental leave, to skyrocketing maternal mortality, and attacks on trans health. Left unchecked, these crises will lead to wider gaps in political participation and representation. For 50 years, Ms . has been forging feminist journalism—reporting, rebelling and truth-telling from the front-lines, championing the Equal Rights Amendment, and centering the stories of those most impacted. With all that’s at stake for equality, we are redoubling our commitment for the next 50 years. In turn, we need your help, Support Ms . today with a donation—any amount that is meaningful to you . For as little as $5 each month , you’ll receive the print magazine along with our e-newsletters, action alerts, and invitations to Ms . Studios events and podcasts . We are grateful for your loyalty and ferocity .

About Anonymous

You may also like:, feminists discuss trump’s 34 felony counts, his mistreatment of women and stormy daniels’ revenge, ‘this doesn’t mean he’s not guilty’: an interview with rowena chiu, a survivor of harvey weinstein.

The Fascinating Science Behind the Body Farm

This essay is about the concept of “body farms” and their crucial role in forensic science and anthropology. It explains how these research facilities, first established by Dr. William Bass in 1981, help study human decomposition under various conditions to improve the accuracy of post-mortem interval (PMI) estimations. The research conducted at body farms enhances forensic methodologies and provides valuable insights into human taphonomy, benefiting both modern criminal investigations and the understanding of ancient human remains.

How it works

Concept of “farm of body”, presumably, foremost causes inconvenience, however these experience resources, what is specialized, obligatory for understanding of human processes of time-table. It is formally known how the judicial centers of research of anthropology, the farms of body are central in the help of judicial researches, identifying bits and pieces, and our advancing penetrating in changes on post mortem.

The introductory farm of body was set by Doctor William Bass in 1981 in University of Tennessee in Knoxville. But opening initiative appeared from a necessity to the detailed data on a human time-table, excelling previous studies, certain on feral models, what inadequate mirror human processes of disintegration.

These resources are foremost concentrated on research, how an ecological alike for variables temperature, humidity, and curriculum of man of action of activity of insect.

In the farms of body, sacrificed human bodies test different scenarios, to simulate the real terms. Some bodies pochowane, second left it is proposed on earth, some submerged in water, and second limited in mechanizations. Researchers of meticulously phase of curriculum of document, collecting central data, beginning critical for an estimation posthumous interval (Pmi) of -the time death. This research refined Pmi of method of determination substantially, substantial in judicial researches.

One of leading additions of farms of body is their role exactly, estimating Pmi. Calculating time, what flows since death is inalienable complicated from numberless influences. The farms of body provide a settlement that is managed, to insulate and to study these variables, bringing more exact Pmi over technique of estimation. Therefore, judicial definiteness of certificate in criminal cases is very propped up.

Additionally, farms of body considerably benefit anthropology, especially in the study of human taphonomy processes, what influences on an organism from death to become numb. Carefully the corresponding penetrating helps archaeologists understand better, how natural terms influence on maintenance of bits’ and pieces of man, thus interpretations of cleaning of old human places.

While the concept of farms of body, presumably, disturbs something, their deep holding to science and society is indisputable. Investigate moves in these resources not only helps in the decision of modern criminal cases but and deepens our understanding to human biology and time-table. Eventually, this work supports a justice and provides a halt for families of deceased.

Thus, farms of body are obligatory experience resources central to judicial science and anthropology. Studying a human time-table on condition of various, these centers do critical data that increase the estimation of Pmi, refine judicial methodologies, and translate critical studies for specialists. Without regard to their sullen nature, the farms of body extend our understanding of death and disintegration, with far-reaching values how for scientific knowledge, so and social benefit.

Cite this page

The Fascinating Science Behind the Body Farm. (2024, Jun 28). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-fascinating-science-behind-the-body-farm/

"The Fascinating Science Behind the Body Farm." PapersOwl.com , 28 Jun 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-fascinating-science-behind-the-body-farm/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Fascinating Science Behind the Body Farm . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-fascinating-science-behind-the-body-farm/ [Accessed: 1 Jul. 2024]

"The Fascinating Science Behind the Body Farm." PapersOwl.com, Jun 28, 2024. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-fascinating-science-behind-the-body-farm/

"The Fascinating Science Behind the Body Farm," PapersOwl.com , 28-Jun-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-fascinating-science-behind-the-body-farm/. [Accessed: 1-Jul-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Fascinating Science Behind the Body Farm . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-fascinating-science-behind-the-body-farm/ [Accessed: 1-Jul-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

Political Scientists Want to Know Why We Hate One Another This Much

By Thomas B. Edsall

Mr. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington, D.C., on politics, demographics and inequality.

Who among us are the most willing to jettison democratic elections? Which voters not only detest their political adversaries but also long for their destruction?

These questions are now at the heart of political science.

Five scholars have capitalized on new measurement techniques to identify partisan sectarian voters, a category that they said “does indeed predict antidemocratic tendencies.”

In their recent paper “ Partisan Antipathy and the Erosion of Democratic Norms ” Eli Finkel of Northwestern, James Druckman of the University of Rochester, Alexander Landry of Stanford, Jay Van Bavel of N.Y.U. and Rick H. Hoyle of Duke made the case that earlier studies of partisan hostility used ratings of the two parties on a scale of 0 (cold) to 100 (very warm) but that that measure failed to show a linkage between such hostility and antidemocratic views.

The five scholars wrote, “Partisan antipathy is indeed to blame, but the guilty party is political sectarianism,” not the thermometer rating system:

Insofar as people experience othering, aversion and moralization toward opposing partisans, they are more likely to support using undemocratic tactics to pass partisan policies: gerrymandering congressional districts, reducing the number of polling stations in locations that support the opposing party, ignoring unfavorable court rulings by opposition-appointed judges, failing to accept the results of elections that one loses and using violence and intimidation toward opposing partisans.

Who, then, falls into this subset of partisan sectarians?

The authors cited nine polling questions that asked voters to assess their feelings toward members of the opposition on a scale of 1 to 6, with 6 the most hostile.

The first set of questions measured what the authors called othering. The most extreme answers were:

I felt as if they and I are on separate planets. I am as different from them as can be. It’s impossible for me to see the world the way they do.

The second set of questions measured aversion:

My feelings toward them are overwhelmingly negative. I have a fierce hatred for them. They have every negative trait in the book.

The third set of questions measured moralization:

They are completely immoral. They are completely evil in every way. They lack any shred of integrity.

How, then, to identify voters high in antidemocratic views? Representative questions here were: “Democratic/Republican governors should ignore unfavorable court rulings by Republican/Democratic-appointed judges” and “Democrats/Republicans should not accept election results if they lose.”

The Finkel et al. analysis linking partisan sectarianism to antidemocratic views received strong support but not a wholesale endorsement from Nicolas Campos and Christopher Federico , political scientists at the University of Minnesota, who modified the Finkel approach.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .