Women's and men's reactions to man-to-man sexual harassment: Does the sexual orientation of the victim matter?

Sex Roles

Volumn 50, Issue 9-10, 2004, Pages 623-639

  DeSouza, Eros ^a   Solberg, Joseph ^b  

^a ILLINOIS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Dept of Fin Ins and Law (5480)   (United States)

Author keywords

Gender differences; Sexual harassment of men; Sexual orientation

Indexed keywords

EID: 3843071905     PISSN: 03600025     EISSN: 15732762     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/b:sers.0000027566.79507.96     Document Type: Review

References (82)

1. Bastian, L. D., Lancaster, A. R., & Reyst, H. E. (1996). Department of Defense 1995 Sexual Harassment Survey. Arlington, VA: Defense Manpower Data Center.
2. Begany, J. J., & Milburn, M. A. (2002). Psychological predictors of sexual harassment: Authoritarianism, hostile sexism, and rape myths. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 3, 119-126.
3. Bennett-Alexander, D. D., & Hartman, L. P. (2001). Employment law for business (3rd ed.). Boston: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
4. Berdahl, J. L., Magley, V. J., & Waldo, C. R. (1996). The sexual harassment of men? Exploring the concept with theory and data. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 527-547.
5. Blumenthal, J. A. (1998). The reasonable woman standard: A meta-analytic review of gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 33-59.
6. Buchanan, N. T. (2002, August). Integrating qualitative methods in examining racialized sexual harassment among African American women. In C. A. Bulger (Chair), Refining, expanding, and integrating knowledge of sexual harassment. Symposium presented at the meeting of the International Coalition Against Sexual Harassment, Chicago, IL.
7. Bundy v. Jackson, 641 F.2d 934 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
8. Burlington Industries v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998).
9. Button, S. B. (2001). Organizational efforts to affirm sexual diversity: A cross-level examination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 17-28.
10. Charney, D. A., & Russell, R. C. (1994). An overview of sexual harassment. American Journal of Psychiatry, 151, 10-17.
11. Cochran, C. C., Frazier, P. A., & Olson, A. M. (1997). Predictors of responses to unwanted sexual attention. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 207-226.
12. Code of Federal Regulations, Vol. 29, x1604.11 (2000).
13. Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity Press.
14. DeSouza, E., & Fansler, A. G. (2003). Contrapower sexual harassment: A survey of students and faculty members. Sex Roles, 48, 529-542.
15. Doe & Doe v. City of Belleville, Illinois, 119 F.3d 563. (7th Cir. 1997).
16. DuBois, C. L. Z., Knapp, D. E., Faley, R. H., & Kustis, G. A. (1998). An empirical examination of same- and other-gender sexual harassment in the workplace. Sex Roles, 9, 731-749.
17. EEOC Compliance Manual (CCH) x 615.2 (b) (3) (1987).
18. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2003, February 6). Sexual Harassment Charges EEOC & FEPAs Combined: FY 1992-FY 2002. Washington, DC. Retrieved February 7, 2003, from http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/harass.html
19. Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998).
20. Fineran, S., & Bennett, L. (1999). Gender and power issues of peer sexual harassment among teenagers. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14, 626-641.
21. Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (1995). Ambivalence and stereotypes cause sexual harassment: A theory with implications for organizational change. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 97-115.
22. Fitzgerald, L. F., Shullman, S., Bailey, N., Richards, M., Swecker, J., Gold, Y., et al. (1988). The incidence and dimensions of sexual harassment in academia and the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 32, 152-175.
23. Foote, W. E., & Goodman-Delahunty, J. (1999). Same-sex harassment: Implications of the Oncale decision for forensic evaluation of plaintiffs. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 17, 123-139.
24. Foulis, D., & McCabe, M. P. (1997). Sexual harassment: Factors affecting attitudes and perceptions. Sex Roles, 37, 773-798.
25. Franke, K. M. (1997). What's wrong with sexual harassment? Stanford Law Review, 49, 691-772.
26. Garcia v. Elf Atochem North America, 28 F.3d 446 (5th Cir. 1994).
27. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491-512.
28. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sexism: Measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119-135.
29. Grauerholz, E. (1989). Sexual harassment of women professors by students: Exploring the dynamics of power, authority, and gender in a university setting. Sex Roles, 21, 789-801.
30. Guiffre, P., & Williams, C. (1994). Boundary lines: Labeling sexual harassment in restaurants. Gender and Society, 8, 378-401.
31. Gutek, B. A. (1985). Sex and the workplace. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
32. Gutek, B. A. (1995). How subjective is sexual harassment? An examination of rater effects. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 447-468.
33. Gutek, B. A., & Done, R. S. (2001). Sexual harassment. In R. K. Unger (Ed.), Handbook of the psychology of women and gender (pp. 367-387). New York: Wiley.
34. Harris v. Forklift Systems, 510 U.S. 17 (1993).
35. Henson v. City of Dundee, 682 F.2d 897 (D.C. Cir. 1982).
36. Hurt, J. L., Maver, J. A., & Hoffman, D. (1999). Situational and individual influences on judgments of hostile environment sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 1395-1415.
37. Illinois Compiled Statutes, Ch. 730, Section 5/5-8-1 (2001a).
38. Illinois Compiled Statutes, Ch. 720, Section 5/12-7.1 (2001b).
39. Katz v. Dole, 709 F.2d 251 (4th Cir. 1983).
40. Katz, R. C., Hannon, R., & Whitten, L. (1996). Effects of gender and situation on the perception of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 34, 35-42.
41. Kovera, M. B., McAuliff, B. D., & Herbert, K. S. (1999). Reasoning about scientific evidence: Effects of juror gender and evidence quality on juror decisions in a hostile work environment case. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 362-375.
42. LaRocca, M. A., & Kromrey, J. D. (1999). Perception of sexual harassment in higher education: Impact of gender and attractiveness. Sex Roles, 40, 921-940.
43. Lawrence v. Texas, 71 U.S.L.W. 4574 (2003).
44. Marks, M. A., & Nelson, E. S. (1993). Sexual harassment on campus: Effects of professor gender on perception of sexually harassing behaviors. Sex Roles, 28, 207-217.
45. Martindale, M. (1991). Sexual harassment in the military: 1988. Sociological Practice Review, 2, 200-216.
46. Masser, B., & Abrams, D. (1999). Contemporary sexism: The relationships among hostility, benevolence, and neosexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 503-517.
47. Matchen, J., & DeSouza, E. (2000). The sexual harassment of faculty members by students. Sex Roles, 42, 295-306.
48. McKinney, K. (1992). Contrapower sexual harassment: The effects of student sex and type of behavior on faculty perception. Sex Roles, 27, 1-17.
49. McKinney v. Dole, 765 F.2d 1129 (D.C. Cir. 1985).
50. McWilliams v. Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, 72 F.3d 1191 (4th Cir. 1996).
51. Meritor v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986).
52. Murolo, N. M., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1997, October). Sexual harassment and manly sports: Are they related? Paper presented at the meeting of the Northeastern Educational Research Association, Ellenville, NY. (EDRS Document Reproduction Service No. ED413570)
53. National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. (2002). Hate crimes map. Retrieved July 29, 2003, from http://www.ngltf.org/library/index.cfm#1
54. National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. (2003). Civil rights map. Retrieved July 29, 2003, from http://www.ngltf.org/library/index.cfm#1
55. Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 83 F.3d 118 (5th Cir. 1996).
56. Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75 (1998).
57. Page, S. (2003, July 28). Gay rights tough to sharpen into political "wedge issue": Shifting attitudes highlights risks for both parties. USA Today, p. 10A.
58. Pharr, S. (1988). Homophobia: A weapon of sexism. Little Rock, AR: Chardon Press.
59. Pryor, J. B., & Whalen, N. J. (1997). A typology of sexual harassment: Characteristics of harassers and the social circumstances under which sexual harassment occurs. In W. O'Donohue (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 130-151). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
60. Pyke, K. D. (1996). Class-based masculinities: The interdependence of gender, class, and interpersonal power. Gender and Society, 10, 527-549.
61. Ragins, B. R., & Cornwell, J. M. (2001). Pink triangles: Antecedents and consequences of perceived workplace discrimination against gay and lesbian employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1244-1261.
62. Rankin, S. R. (2003). Campus climate for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people: A national perspective. New York: National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute.
63. Reilly, M. E., Lott, B., Caldwell, D., & DeLuca, L. (1992). Tolerance of sexual harassment related to self-reported sexual victimization. Gender and Society, 6, 122-138.
64. Reilly, M. E., Lott, B., & Gallogly, S. M. (1986). Sexual harassment of university students. Sex Roles, 15, 333-358.
65. Rospenda, K. M., Richman, J. A., & Nawyn, S. J. (1998). Doing power: The confluence of gender, race, and class in contrapower sexual harassment. Gender and Society, 12, 40-60.
66. Rotundo, M., Nguyen, D. H., & Sackett, P. R. (2001). A meta-analytic review of gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 914-922.
67. Sanday, P. R. (1990). Fraternity gang rape: Sex, brotherhood, and privilege on campus. New York: New York University Press.
68. Sigal, J., Braden-Maguire, J., Patt, I., Goodrich, C., & Perrino, C. S. (2003). Effects of type of coping response, setting, and social context on reactions to sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 48, 157-166.
69. Stermac, L., Sheridan, P. M., Davidson, A., & Dunn, S. (1996). Sexual assault of adult males. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11, 52-64.
70. Stockdale, M. S., Visio, M., & Batra, L. (1999). The sexual harassment of men: Evidence for a broader theory of sexual harassment and sexual discrimination. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 630-664.
71. Strauss, S. (2003). Sexual harassment in K-12. In M. Paludi & C. A. Paludi Jr. (Eds.), Academic and workplace sexual harassment: A handbook of cultural, social science, management, and legal perspectives (pp. 105-145). Westport, CT: Praeger.
72. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. x2000 et seq. (as amended by Pub. L. No. 102-166 (1991)).
73. U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. (1981). Sexual harassment in the federal workplace: Is it a problem? Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
74. U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. (1988). Sexual harassment in the Federal Government: An update. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
75. U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. (1995).Sexual harassment in the Federal Government: Trends, progress, continuing challenges. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
76. Waldo, C. R., Berdahl, J. L., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1998). Are men sexually harassed? If so by whom? Law and Human Behavior, 22, 59-79.
77. Wayne, J. H., Riordan, C. M., & Thomas, K. C. (2001). Is all sexual harassment viewed the same? Mock juror decisions in same- and cross-gender cases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 179-187.
78. Whitley, B. E., Jr. (2001). Gender-role variables and attitudes toward homosexuality. Sex Roles, 45, 691-721.
79. Wiener, R. L., & Hurt, L. E. (2000). How do people evaluate social sexual conduct at work? A psycholegal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 75-85.
80. Wiener, R. L., Hurt, L., Russell, B., Mannen, K., & Gasper, C. (1997). Perceptions of sexual harassment: The effects of gender, legal standard, and ambivalent sexism. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 71-93.
81. Wiener, R. L., Watts, B. A., Goldkamp, K. H., & Gasper, C. (1995). Social analytic investigation of hostile work environments: A test of the reasonable woman standard. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 263-281.
82. Wrightson v. Pizza Hut of America, Inc., 99 F.3d 138 (4th Cir. 1996).