Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T00:54:36.992Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“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

Justine E. Tinkler
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , Spring 2008 , pp. 417 - 445
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. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

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.Google 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 1:3–7.Google Scholar
Bobo, Lawrence. 1983. Whites’ Opposition to Busing: Symbolic Racism or Realistic Group Conflict? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45:1196–1210.Google 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.Google 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.Google 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.Google Scholar
Durkheim, Emile. 1984. The Division of Labor in Society. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B. 1992. Legal Ambiguity and Symbolic Structures: Organizational Mediation of Civil Rights Law. American Journal of Sociology 97:1531–76.Google 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.Google 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 64:291–449.Google Scholar
Ewick, Patricia, and Silbey, Susan S. 1998. The Common Place of Law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google 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 8:378–401.Google Scholar
Gruber, James. 1989. How Women Handle Sexual Harassment: A Literature Review. Sociology & Social Research 74:3–9.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 71:589–617.Google Scholar
Kluegel, James, and Smith, Eliot. 1983. Affirmative Action Attitudes: Effects of Self-Interest, Racial Affect, and Stratification Beliefs on Whites’ Views. Social Forces 61:797–824.Google 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.Google Scholar
Marshall, Anna Maria. 2005. Idle Rights: Employees’ Rights Consciousness and the Construction of Sexual Harassment Policies. Law & Society Review 39:83–123.Google 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.Google 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.Google 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.Google Scholar
Nelson, Thomas E., Acker, Michelle, and Melvin, Manis. 1996. Irrepressible Stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 32:13–38.Google 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.Google 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 28:698–723.Google Scholar
Quinn, Beth. 2000. The Paradox of Complaining: Law, Humor, and Harassment in the Everyday Work World. Law & Social Inquiry 25 (4): 151–85.Google Scholar
Quinn, Beth. 2002. Sexual Harassment and Masculinity: The Power and Meaning of “Girl-Watching.” Gender & Society 16:386–402.Google Scholar
Rudman, Laurie, and Kilianski, Stephen. 2000. Implicit and Explicit Attitudes Toward Female Authority. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 26:1315–28.Google Scholar
Saguy, Abigail C. 2000. Employment Discrimination or Sexual Violence?: Defining Sexual Harassment in American and French Law. Law & Society Review 34 (4): 1091–1128.Google 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.Google 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.Google Scholar
Silbey, Susan. 2005. After Legal Consciousness. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 1:323–368.Google 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.Google 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.Google Scholar
Uggen, Christopher, and Blackstone, Amy. 2004. Sexual Harassment as a Gendered Expression of Power. American Sociological Review 69:64–92.Google 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. 93:47–107.Google Scholar
Welsh, Sandy. 1999. Gender and Sexual Harassment. Annual Review of Sociology 25:169–90.Google 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 20:87–107.Google 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 21:71–93.Google Scholar
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 25:73–93.Google Scholar
York, Kenneth, Barclay, Lizabeth, and Zajack, Amy. 1997. Preventing Sexual Harassment: The Effect of Multiple Training Methods. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 10:277–285.Google 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 27:33–48.Google Scholar