Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-79b67bcb76-dxgz2 Total loading time: 0.19 Render date: 2021-05-16T04:26:48.057Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

“People Are Too Quick to Take Offense”: The Effects of Legal Information and Beliefs on Definitions of Sexual Harassment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Abstract

Using data from a nationwide study of sexual harassment in the United States’ federal workplace, this article investigates how legal understanding, opinions about the regulation of sexual harassment, and social status affect whether people define uninvited sexual jokes or remarks as harassment. The results indicate that how people define sexual harassment is directly related to the extent to which they view sexual harassment rules as ambiguous and threatening to workplace norms. Moreover, results show that while women generally define sexual harassment more broadly than men, they actually resist defining sexual jokes or remarks as harassment. Finally, knowledge of the workplace sexual harassment policy moderates the effect of beliefs on definitions of sexual harassment. These findings suggest a complexity in the way people reconcile their knowledge of the law with their personal views about power and social interaction in the workplace.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2008 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Antecol, Heather, and Cobb-Clark, Deborah. 2003. Does Sexual Harassment Training Change Attitudes? A View from the Federal Level. Social Science Quarterly 84:826–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allport, Gordon. 1954. The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Berelson, Bernard R., Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and McPhee, William N. 1954. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Blumer, H. 1958. Racial Prejudice as a Sense of Group Position. Pacific Sociological Review 1:37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bobo, Lawrence. 1983. Whites’ Opposition to Busing: Symbolic Racism or Realistic Group Conflict? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45:11961210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bobocel, D. Ramona, Hing, Leanne Son, Davey, Liane, Stanley, David, and Zanna, Mark. 1998. Justice-Based Opposition to Social Policies: Is It Genuine? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75:653–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bisom-Rapp, Susan. 2001. An Ounce of Prevention Is a Poor Substitute for a Pound of Cure: Confronting the Developing Jurisprudence of Education and Prevention in Employment Discrimination Law. Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law 22:101–46.Google Scholar
Bumiller, Kristin. 1988. The Civil Rights Society: The Social Construction of Victims. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar
Darley, John M., Robinson, Paul H., and Carlsmith, Kevin M. 2001. The Ex-Ante Function of the Criminal Law. Law & Society Review 35:165–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobbin, Frank, and Kelly, Erin L. 2007. How to Stop Harassment: Professional Construction of Legal Compliance in Organizations. American Journal of Sociology 112:1203–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durkheim, Emile. 1984. The Division of Labor in Society. New York: The Free Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B. 1992. Legal Ambiguity and Symbolic Structures: Organizational Mediation of Civil Rights Law. American Journal of Sociology 97:1531–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B., Uggen, Christopher, and Erlanger, Howard S. 1999. The Endogeneity of Legal Regulation: Grievance Procedures as Rational Myth. American Journal of Sociology 105 (2): 406–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engel, David M. 1993. Law in the Domains of Everyday Life: The Construction of Community and Difference. In Law in Everyday Life, ed. Sarat, Austin and Kearns, Thomas. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Cynthia Fuchs, Sauve, Robert, Oglensky, Bonnie, and Gever, Martha. 1995. Glass Ceilings and Open Doors: Women's Advancement in the Legal Profession. A Report to the Committee on Women in the Profession, the Association of the Bar of the City of New York. Fordham Law Review 64:291449.Google Scholar
Ewick, Patricia, and Silbey, Susan S. 1998. The Common Place of Law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felstiner, William L. F., Abel, Richard L., and Sarat, Austin. 198081. The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes: Naming, Blaming, Claiming… Law & Society Review 15 (3–4): 631–54.Google Scholar
Giuffre, Patti, and Williams, Christine. 1994. Boundary Lines: Labeling Sexual Harassment in Restaurants. Gender & Society 8:378401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, James. 1989. How Women Handle Sexual Harassment: A Literature Review. Sociology & Social Research 74:39.Google Scholar
Jackman, Mary. 1994. The Velvet Glove: Paternalism and Conflict in Gender, Class, and Race Relations. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Kagan, Robert A. 2003. Adversarial Legalism and American Government: The American Way of Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kalev, Alexandra, Dobbin, Frank, and Kelly, Erin. 2006. Best Practices or Best Guesses: Diversity Management and the Remediation of Inequality. American Sociological Review 71:589617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluegel, James, and Smith, Eliot. 1983. Affirmative Action Attitudes: Effects of Self-Interest, Racial Affect, and Stratification Beliefs on Whites’ Views. Social Forces 61:797824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, J. Scott, and Freese, Jeremy. 2001. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, Anna Maria. 2003. Injustice Frames, Legality, and the Everyday Construction of Sexual Harassment. Law & Social Inquiry 28 (3): 659–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, Anna Maria. 2005. Idle Rights: Employees’ Rights Consciousness and the Construction of Sexual Harassment Policies. Law & Society Review 39:83123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, Anna Maria, and Barclay, Scott. 2003. In Their Own Words: How Ordinary People Construct the Legal World. Law & Social Inquiry 28 (3): 617–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntyre, Lisa J. 1994. Law in the Sociological Enterprise: A Reconstruction. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle. 1990. Getting Justice and Getting Even, Legal Consciousness among Working-class Americans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Moyer, Robert, and Nath, Anjan. 1998. Some Effects of Brief Training Interventions on Perceptions of Sexual Harassment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 28:333–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, Charles W., Coster, Stacy De, and Estes, Sarah Beth. 2001. Sexual Harassment in the Workplace, Unanticipated Consequences of Modern Social Control in Organizations Work and Occupations 28:411–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Thomas E., Acker, Michelle, and Melvin, Manis. 1996. Irrepressible Stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 32:1338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, Laura Beth. 2000. Situating Legal Consciousness: Experiences and Attitudes of Ordinary Citizens about Law and Street Harassment. Law & Society Review 34:1055–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, Laura Beth. 2004. License to Harass: Law, Hierarchy and Offensive Public Speech. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Perry, Elisa, Kulik, Carol, and Schmidtke, James 1998. Individual Differences in the Effectiveness of Sexual Harassment Awareness Training. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 28:698723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinn, Beth. 2000. The Paradox of Complaining: Law, Humor, and Harassment in the Everyday Work World. Law & Social Inquiry 25 (4): 151–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinn, Beth. 2002. Sexual Harassment and Masculinity: The Power and Meaning of “Girl-Watching.” Gender & Society 16:386402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudman, Laurie, and Kilianski, Stephen. 2000. Implicit and Explicit Attitudes Toward Female Authority. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 26:1315–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saguy, Abigail C. 2000. Employment Discrimination or Sexual Violence?: Defining Sexual Harassment in American and French Law. Law & Society Review 34 (4): 10911128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saguy, Abigail C. 2003. What is Sexual Harassment? Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Sarat, Austin, and Kearns, Thomas, eds. 1993. Beyond the Great Divide: Forms of Legal Scholarship and Everyday Life. In Law in Everyday Life. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Schultz, Vicki. 2003. The Sanitized Workplace. Yale Law Journal 112:2061–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidanius, Jim, Pratto, Felicia, and Bobo, Lawrence. 1996. Racism, Conservatism, Affirmative Action, and Intellectual Sophistication: A Matter of Principled Conservatism or Group Dominance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70:476–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silbey, Susan. 2005. After Legal Consciousness. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 1:323368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, Laura W. 1999. Sexual Harassment in America: A Documentary History. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Suchman, Mark C., and Edelman, Lauren B. 1996. Legal Rational Myths: The New Institutionalism and the Law and Society Tradition. Law & Social Inquiry 21 (4): 903–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tinkler, Justine. 2007. A Social Psychological Analysis of Resistance to Sexual Harassment Law: Implications for Equal Opportunity. PhD diss., Department of Sociology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
Tinkler, Justine E., Li, Yan E., and Mollborn, Stefanie. 2007. Can Legal Interventions Change Beliefs?: The Effect of Exposure to Sexual Harassment Policy on Men's Gender Beliefs. Social Psychology Quarterly 70:480–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uggen, Christopher, and Blackstone, Amy. 2004. Sexual Harassment as a Gendered Expression of Power. American Sociological Review 69:6492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United States Merit Systems Protection Board. 1995. Sexual Harassment in the Federal Workplace: Trends, Progress, Continuing Challenges. http://www.mspb.gov/netsearch/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=253661&version=253948&application=ACROBAT (accessed December 12, 2007).Google Scholar
Vento, Carol Schultz. 2001. When is Work Environment Intimidating, Hostile or Offensive so as to Constitute Sexual Harassment Under State Law? American Law Reports, 5th Series. 93:47107.Google Scholar
Welsh, Sandy. 1999. Gender and Sexual Harassment. Annual Review of Sociology 25:169–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welsh, Sandy, Carr, Jacquie, MacQuarrie, Barbara, and Huntley, Audrey. 2006. “I'm Not Thinking of it as Sexual Harassment”: Understanding Harassment across Race and Citizenship. Gender & Society 20:87107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiener, Richard, Hurt, Linda, Russell, Brenda, Mannen, Kelley, and Gasper, Charles. 1997. Perceptions of Sexual Harassment: The Effects of Gender, Legal Standard, and Ambivalent Sexism. Law and Human Behavior 21:7193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, Christine L., Giuffre, Patti, and Dellinger, Kirsten. 1999. Sexuality in the Workplace: Organizational Control, Sexual Harassment, and the Pursuit of Pleasure. Annual Review of Sociology 25:7393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
York, Kenneth, Barclay, Lizabeth, and Zajack, Amy. 1997. Preventing Sexual Harassment: The Effect of Multiple Training Methods. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 10:277285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yngvesson, Barbara. 1993. Virtuous Citizens, Disruptive Subjects: Order and Complaint in a New England Court. New York: Routeledge.Google Scholar
Zimring, Franklin, and Hawkins, Gordon. 1971. The Legal Threat as an Instrument of Social Change. Journal of Social Issues 27:3348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

“People Are Too Quick to Take Offense”: The Effects of Legal Information and Beliefs on Definitions of Sexual Harassment
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

“People Are Too Quick to Take Offense”: The Effects of Legal Information and Beliefs on Definitions of Sexual Harassment
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

“People Are Too Quick to Take Offense”: The Effects of Legal Information and Beliefs on Definitions of Sexual Harassment
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *