Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:21:33.379Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Employment Discrimination or Sexual Violence? Defining Sexual Harassment in American and French Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

Abigail C. Saguy
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this article I examine how and why the term “sexual harassment” has been defined very differently in American and French law. Drawing on political and legal history, I argue that feminists mobilized in both countries to create sexual harassment law, but encountered dissimilar political, legal, and cultural constraints and resources. Having adapted to these distinct opportunities and constraints, feminists and other social actors produced sexual harassment laws that varied by body of law, definition of harm, scope, and remedy. I conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for studies of culture, gender and the state, globalization, and public policy.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 34 , Issue 4 , 2000 , pp. 1091 - 1128
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 by the Law and Society Association

Footnotes

Funding for this project was provided by the National Science Foundation, the Department of Sociology at Princeton University, a pre-dissertation fellowship from the Council for European Studies (Columbia University), the Woodrow Wilson Society, and the French government. Support has also been provided by the following: Princeton University-based research grants: the program in French Studies, the Center of International Studies, the Compton Fund, the Council on Regional Studies, and the Center of Domestic and Comparative Policy Studies. Earlier versions of this were presented at the Princeton University Sociology Graduate Student Dissertation Support Group, the Woodrow Wilson Society, the “Junta” on Organizations, Institutions, and Economic Sociology (JOIE) in the Department of Sociology at Princeton University, at the Crime/Law/Deviance Reading Group at Columbia University, a Robert Wood Johnson Health Scholars Program workshop at Yale University, and at the Departments of Sociology of UCLA, University of Massachusetts, and University of Minnesota. I benefited greatly from comments made by participants, especially Bo Burt, Lynn Chancer, David Greenburg, Dirk Hartog, Kieran Healy, Jason Kaufman, Stan Katz, Erin Kelly, Kenneth Mack, Ted Marmor, Francesca Polletta, Bill Roy, Becky Pettit, Ari Shapiro, Mark Suchman, Mark Thomas, and Bruce Western. Michèle Lamont, Paul DiMaggio, and Viviana Zelizer commented on several drafts and provided extremely valuable feedback. Paul DiMaggio and Frank Dobbin commented on an oral presentation that drew from this work, which helped me think more clearly about the project, thus strengthening this piece. I am thankful for the valuable legal guidance I received from my friends Jerrob Duffy and Alyssa Qualls, and from Liz Evans and Radu Popa at the NYU Law Library. I have learned a great deal in discussions over the years from my fellow scholars of cross-national approaches to sexual harassment, Mia Cahill and Kathrina Zippel. I owe many thanks to Susan Silbey, Vicki Schultz, and three anonymous reviewers for the Law and Society Review for helpful comments. Finally, I am greatly indebted to the Association Contre les Violences Faites aux Femmes au Travail (AVFT) for the use of their extensive legal archives and for the guidance several members, especially Catherine LeMagueresse and Marie-Victoire Louis, provided. I take full responsibility for all errors.

References

References

Abrams, Kathryn (1989) Symposium: The State of the Union: Civil Rights: Gender Discrimination and the Transformation of Workplace Norms. Vand. L. Rev. May, 1183—1248.Google Scholar
Abrams, Kathryn (1998) “The New Jurisprudence of Sexual Harassment,” 83 Cornell Law Review 1169–1230.Google Scholar
Aeberhard-Hodges, J. (1996) “Sexual Harassment in Employment: Recent Judicial and Arbitral Trends,” 135 International Labour Rev. 499–533.Google Scholar
Nationale, Assemblée (1997) 202 “Projet de loi relatif à la prévention et à la répression des infractions sexuelles ainsi qu'a la protection des mineurs.” Pp. 11, 27.Google Scholar
AVFT, ed. (1990a) De l'abus de pouvoir sexuel: Le harcèlement sexuel au travail. Paris and Montreal: La Découverte/Le Boréal.Google Scholar
AVFT, ed. (1990b) “Proposition d'amendement de L'AVFT,” Cette violence dont nous ne voulons plus, 10 June.Google Scholar
Badinter, Elisabeth (1991) “La Chasse aux Sorcières,” Le Nouvel Observateur, 17–23 Oct., p. 82.Google Scholar
Banton, Michael (1994) “Effective Implementation of the UN Racial Convention,” 20 (3) New Community 475–87.Google Scholar
Benneytout, Mirielle, Cromer, Sylvie & Louis, Marie-Victoire (1992) “Harcèlement sexuel: Une réforme restrictive qui n'est pas sans danger,” 599 Semaine Sociale Lamy 3–4.Google Scholar
Berger, Peter L., & Luckman, Thomas (1967) The Social Construction of Reality. Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor.Google Scholar
Berkovitch, Nitza (1999) From Motherhood to Citizenship: Women's Rights and International Organizations. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Anita (1994) “Law, Culture, and Harassment,” 142 Univ. of Pennsylvania Law Rev. 1227–1311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, Robert C. (1997) “More Than a Congressional Joke: A Fresh Look at the Legislative History of Sex Discrimination of the 1964 Civil Rights Act,” 3 William & Mary J. of Women & the Law 137–61.Google Scholar
Bleich, Erik (2000) “Integrating Ideas into Policymaking Paradigms: The Case of Race Frames in Britain and France.” Presented at the Conference of Europeanists, Mar. 30, Chicago.Google Scholar
Boli, John, & Thomas, George M. (1997) “World Culture in the World Polity: A Century of International Non-Governmental Organization,” 62 (2) American Sociological Rev. 171–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boltanski, Luc (1987) The Making of a Class: Cadres in French Society. Cambridge, Eng.: Univ. Press, and Paris: Maison de la Science de L'Homme.Google Scholar
Boltanski, Luc, & Thévenot, Laurent (1991) De la justification: Les économies de la grandeur. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Boureau, Alain (1995) Le Droit De Cuissage: La Fabrication d'un Mythe XIIe-XXe Siècle. Paris: Albin Michel.Google Scholar
Brauer, Carl M. (1983) “Women Activists, Southern Conservatives, and the Prohibition of Sex Discrimination in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act,” 49 J. of Southern History 37–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browne, Kingsley (1998) “Free Speech.” Presented at the Symposium on Sexual Harassment, Feb. 28. New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
Brubaker, Rogers (1992) Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chancer, Lynn (1992) Sadomasochism in Everyday Life: The Dynamics of Power and Powerlessness. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Lloyd R. (1991) “Sexual Harassment and the Law.” Society 8–13 (May-June).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craib, Ralph (1977) “Sex and Women at UC Berkeley-2 Surveys,” San Francisco Chronicle. 22 July, p. 5.Google Scholar
Cromer, Sylvie (1990) “France: AVFT,” in AVFT, ed., De l'abus de pouvoir sexuel: le harcèlement sexuel au travail. Paris: La Découverte/Le Boréal.Google Scholar
Cromer, Sylvie (1992) “Histoire d'une loi: La pénalisation du harcèlement sexuel dans le nouveau code pénal,” 1 Projets féministes. 108–17 (March).Google Scholar
Cromer, Sylvie (1995) Le Harcèlement Sexuel en France: La Levée d'un Tabou 1985–1990. Paris: La Document Française.Google Scholar
Cromer, Sylvie, & Louis, Marie-Victoire (1992) “Existe-t-il un harcèlement sexuel ”à la française“?” 10 (3) French Politics & Society 37–43.Google Scholar
Crozier, Michel (1964) The Bureaucratic Phenomenon. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dekeuwer-Defossez, Françoise (1993) “Le harcèlement sexuel en droit français: Discrimination ou atteinte à la liberté?” 3662 (13) La Semaine Juridique 137–41.Google Scholar
Desrosières, Alain, & Thévenot, Laurent (1988) Les catégories socio-professionelles. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
Dhavernas, Odile (1987) “Le Harcèlement Sexuel,” 57-58 Actes 78.Google Scholar
Dobbin, Frank (1993) “The Social Construction of the Great Depression: Industrial Policy During the 1930s in the United States, Britain, and France,” 22 Theory & Society 1–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Mary (1986) How Institutions Think. Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Durkheim, Emile ([1960] 1990) Les Formes Elémentaires de la vie religieuse: Le systeme totemique en Australie. Paris: Quadrige/PUF.Google Scholar
Elman, R. A. (1996) Sexual Subordination and State Intervention: Comparing Sweden and the United States. Providence, RI and Oxford: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, Gosta (1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Estrich, Susan (1991) “Sex at Work,” 43 Stanford Law Rev. 813–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Sara (1989) Born for Liberty. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Ezekiel, Judith (1995) “Anti-féminisme et anti-américanisme: Un mariage politiquement réussi,” 17(1) Nouvelles Questions Féministes 59–76.Google Scholar
Farley, Lin (1978) Sexual Shakedown: The Sexual Harassment of Women on the Job. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Fassin, Eric (1998) “PaCS socialista: la gauche et le ‘juste milieu’.” 12-13 Le Banquet 147–159.Google Scholar
Felgentrager, Margot (1996) Droit et harcèlement sexuel. Pratiques Psychologiques 45–48.Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan T. & Linville, Patricia W. (1980) “What Does the Schema Concept Buy Us?” 6 Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 543–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franke, Katherine (1997) “What's Wrong With Sexual Harassment?” 49 (4) Stanford Law Rev. 691–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedland, Roger, & Alford, Robert (1991) “Bringing the State Back In: Symbols, Practices, and Institutional Contradictions,” in Powell, W. & DiMaggio, P., eds., The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gamson, William (1992) Talking Politics. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony (1984) The Constitution of Society. Berkeley and Los Angeles: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Gilbert J., & Koreski, Jean G. (1977) “Sexual Advances by an Employee's Supervisor: A Sex-Discrimination Violation of Title VII?” 3 Employee Relations Law J. 83–93.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving (1974) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience, NY: Harper Colophon.Google Scholar
Gold, Michael E. (1981) “A Tale of Two Amendments: The Reasons Congress Added Sex to Title VII and Their Implications for the Issue of Comparable Worth,” 19 Duquesne Law Review 453–77.Google Scholar
Hager, Mark McLaughlin (1998) “Harassment as a Tort: Why Title VII Hostile Environment Liability Should Be Curtailed.” 30 Connecticut Law Rev. 375–439.Google Scholar
Harris, Louis (1991) Le Harcèlement sexuel: Enquête des français: Perceptions, opinions et Evaluation du Phénomène. Paris, France: Louis Harris survey.Google Scholar
Heinich, Nathalie (1991) “Pour introduire la cadre-analyse,” 535 Critique 936–53.Google Scholar
Husbands, Robert (1992) “Sexual Harassment Law in Employment: An International Perspective,” 131 (6) International Labour Rev. 535–559.Google Scholar
Jenson, Jane, & Sineau, Mariette (1995) Mitterand et les Françaises: Un rendez-vous manqué. Paris: Presses de la Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques.Google Scholar
Assemblée Nationale, J. O. (1991) “le Séance du jeudi 20 juin 1991,” 56 (1) J. Officiel de la République Français.Google Scholar
Jolibois, Charles (1998) “Sénat rapport, session ordinaire de 1997–1998,” 4 (265) J. Officiel de la République Française 32–33.Google Scholar
Journal Officiel de la République Français (1998) “Sénat débats parlementaires: Compte rendu intégal: Séance du Mardi 31 Mars 1998 (67e Jour de Séance de la Session),” 25 J. officiel de la République Français 1369–70.Google Scholar
Kramer, Jane (2000) “Liberty, Equality, Sorority: French Women Demand Their Share,” The New Yorker (May) pp. 112–23.Google Scholar
Lamont, Michèle (1992) Money, Morals, and Manners: The Culture of the French and American Upper-Middle Class. Chicago and London: Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamont, Michèle (2000) The Dignity of Working Men: Morality and the Boundaries of Race, Class, and Immigration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press, and New York: Russell Sage Foundation.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamont, Michèle, & Thévenot, Laurent (2000) “Introduction” to M. Lamont & L. Thévenot, eds., Rethinking Comparative Cultural Sociology: Repertoires of Evaluation in France and the United States. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamont, Michele, & Wuthnow, Robert (1990) “Betwixt and Between: Recent Cultural Sociology in Europe and the United States,” in Ritzer, G., ed., Frontiers of Social Theory: The New Synthesis. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Langelan, Martha J. (1993) Back Off! How to Confront Sexual Harassment and Harassers. New York: Fireside.Google Scholar
Louis, Marie-Victoire (1994) Le droit de cuissage. Paris: Les Editions de l'Atelier.Google Scholar
Louis, Marie-Victoire (1999) “Harcèlement sexuel et domination masculine,” in Bard, C., ed., Un siècle d'anti-féminisme. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, Catharine (1979) Sexual Harassment of Working Women. New Haven, CT and London: Yale Univ. Press.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, Catharine (1982) Feminism, Marxism, Method and the State: An Agenda for Theory. Signs 7, 533—44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKinnon, Catharine (1987) “Sexual Harassment: Its First Decade in Court,” in MacKinnon, C., ed., Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Mannheim, Karl (1956) Essays on the Sociology of Culture. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
McGee, Jack J. Jr. (1976) Note, “Sexual Advances by Male Supervisory Personnel as Actionable under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Corne v. Bausch & Lomb, Inc., Williams v. Saxbe,” 17 South Texas Law J. 409–415.Google Scholar
Meyer, John W. (1994) “Rationalized Environments,” in Meyer, J. & Scott, W. R., eds., Institutional Environments and Organizations: Structural Complexity and Individualism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Meyer, John W., Kamens, David, Benavot, Aaron, Cha, Yun Kyoung & Wong, Suk-Ying (1991) “Knowledge for the Masses: World Models and National Curricula, 1920–1986,” 56 American Sociological Rev. 85–100.Google Scholar
Michigan Law Review (1978) Note, “Sexual Harassment and Title VII: The Foundation for the Elimination of Sexual Cooperation as an Employment Condition,” 76 Michigan Law Rev. 1007.Google Scholar
Minnesota Law Review (1979) Note, “Legal Remedies for Employment Related Sexual Harassment,” 64 Minnesota Law Rev. 151.Google Scholar
Minow, Martha (1990) Making All the Difference. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Moscovici, Serge (1984) “The Phenomenon of Social Representations,” in Farr, R. M. & Moscovici, S., eds., Social Representations. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Noiriel, Gerard (1992) Population, immigration et identite nationale en France XIXe–XXe siecle. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar
New York University Law Review (1976) “Comment,” 51 New York Univ. Law Rev. 148.Google Scholar
Oppenheimer, David B. (1995) “Exacerbating the Exasperating: Title VII Liability of Employers for Sexual Harassment Committed by Their Supervisors,” 81 (1) Cornell Law Rev. 66–153.Google Scholar
Pedriana, Nicholas, & Stryker, Robin (1997) “Culture Wars 1960s Style: Equal Employment Opportunity—Affirmative Action Law and the Philadelphia Plan,” 103 American J. of Sociology 633–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Picq, Françoise (1993) Libération Des Femmes: Les Années-Mouvement. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Redbook (1976) “How Do You Handle Sex on the Job? A Redbook Questionnaire,” Redbook (January) 74–75.Google Scholar
Roy-Loustaunau, Claude (1995) “Le droit du harcèlement sexuel: Un puzzle legislatif et des choix novateurs,” Droit Social n° 5 juin, p. 545–50.Google Scholar
Rubinstein, Michael (1988 [1987]) “The Dignity of Women at Work: A Report on the Problem of Sexual Harassment in the Member States of the European Communities,” Bruxelles October 1987. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; Washington, DC: European Community Information Service [distributor].Google Scholar
Rupp, Leila, & Taylor, Verta (1987) Survival in the Doldrums. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Saguy, Abigail (2000) “Sexual Harassment in France and the United States: Activists and Public Figures Defend Their Definitions,” in Lamont, M. & Thévenot, L., eds., Rethinking Comparative Cultural Sociology: Repertoires of Evaluation in France and the United States. Cambridge, Eng./Paris: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Saguy, Abigail (2001) Is This Sexual Harassment? A Comparison of the United States and France. Berkeley and Los Angeles: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
Schulhofer, Stephen J. (1998) Unwanted Sex: The Culture of Intimidation and the Failure of Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Schultz, Vicki (1998) “Reconceptualizing Sexual Harassment,” 107 Yale Law J. 1732–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, Joan W. (1995) “‘Vive La Difference!”‘ 87 Le Débat (Nov.-Dec):134–39.Google Scholar
Scott, Joan W. (1996) Only Paradoxes To Offer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, Joan W. (1997) “‘La Querelle Des Femmes’ in the Late Twentieth Century,” 226 New Left Rev. 3–19.Google Scholar
Sewell, William H. Jr. (1992) “A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation,” 98 American J. of Sociology 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seymour, William C. (1979) “Sexual Harassment: Finding a Cause for Action under Title VII,” 30 Labor Law Journal 139–64.Google Scholar
Snow, David A., Rochford, E. B. J., Worden, Steven K. & Benford, Robert D. (1986) “Frame Alignment Processes, Microbilization, and Movement Participation,” 51 American Sociological Rev. 464–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, David, & Benford, Robert D. (1988) “Ideology, Frame Resonance, and Participant Mobilization,” 1 International Social Movement Research 197–217.Google Scholar
Strang, David, & Meyer, John (1994) “Institutional Conditions for Diffusion.” in Meyer, J. & Scott, W.R., eds., Institutional Environments and Organizations: Structural Complexity and Individualism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Stryker, Robin (1994) “Rules, Resources, and Legitimacy Processes: Some Implications for Social Conflict, Order, and Change,” 99 American J. of Sociology (January) 847–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, Cass (1998) “Damages in Sexual Harassment Cases.” Presented at the Symposium on Sexual Harassment, New Haven, CT, 28 Feb.Google Scholar
Swidler, Ann (1988) “Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies,” 51 American Sociological Rev. 273–86.Google Scholar
Tarrow, Sidney (1992) “Mentalities, Political Cultures, and Collective Action Frames: Constructing Meanings Through Action.” in Morris, A.D., & Mueller, C.M., eds., Frontiers in Social Movement Theory. New Haven and London: Yale Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Taub, Nadine (1980) “Keeping Women in Their Place: Stereotyping Per Se as a Form of Employment Discrimination,” 21(2) Boston College Law Rev. 345–418.Google Scholar
Tong, Rosmarie (1984) Women, Sex, and the Law. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allanheld.Google Scholar
Toobin, Jeffrey (1998) “The Trouble with Sex: Why the Law of Sexual Harassment Has Never Worked,” New Yorker (9 Feb.): 48–55.Google Scholar
U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (1981) Sexual Harassment in the Federal Workforce: Is It a Problem? Washington, DC: GPO.Google Scholar
UFF (1991) “Proposition de loi pénale de l'UFF,” 19 Clara (Summer) pp. 23–27.Google Scholar
Vhay, Michael D. (1988) “The Harms of Asking: Towards a Comprehensive Treatment of Sexual Harassment” 55 University of Chicago Law Rev. 328–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Working Women United Institute (1975) Sexual Harassment on the Job: Results of a Preliminary Survey. New York: Working Women United Institute.Google Scholar
Wright, Erik O., Baxter, Janeen & Birkelund, Gunn E. (1995) “The Gender Gap in Workplace Authority: A Cross-National Study,” 60 American Sociological Review 407–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wuthnow, Robert (1987) Meaning and the Moral Order: Explorations in Cultural Analysis. Berkeley, CA and Los Angeles: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
Zippel, Kathrina (2000) “Comparative Perspectives of Sex Equality Policies in Germany, the European Union, and the United States: The Example of Sexual Harassment.” Ph.D. diss. Department of Sociology. Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Barnes v. Train, Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 123 (D.D.C. 1974), revd sub nom..Google Scholar
Barnes v. Costle, 561 F.2d 983 (D.C. Cir. 1977).Google Scholar
Bundy v. Jackson, 641 F.2d. 934 (D.C. Cir. 1981).Google Scholar
Burlington Industries v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998).Google Scholar
Come v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 390 F. Supp. 161 (D. Ariz. 1975).Google Scholar
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998).Google Scholar
Garber v. Saxon Business Products, 552 F.2d 1032 (4th Cir. 1977).Google Scholar
Harris v. Forklift Systems, 510 U.S. 17 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henson v. City of Dundee, 682 F.2d. 897 (11th Cir. 1982).Google Scholar
Meritor v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller v. Bank of America, 418 F. Supp 233 (N.D. Cal. 1976).Google Scholar
Oncale v. Sundower Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75 (1998).Google Scholar
Rabidue v. Osceola Refining Co., 584 F. Supp. 419, 428 n. 36 (E.D. Mich. 1984).Google Scholar
Rogers v. EEOC, 454 F.2d 234 (5th Cir. 1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson v. Jacksonville Shipyards Inc., 760 F. Supp. 1486 (M.D. Fla. 1991).Google Scholar
Shellhammer v. Lewallen. 4 Eq. Opportunity in Hous. Rep. (P-H) 15,472, at 16, 127 (W.D. Ohio Nov. 22, 1983).Google Scholar
Tomkins v. Public Service Electric and Gas Co., 568 F.2d 1044 (3rd Cir. 1977).Google Scholar

Statutes, Laws, and Guidelines Cited

Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub. L. 102–166, § 102, 105 Stat. 1071, 1072 (1991) (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1981a (1994)).Google Scholar
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § § 2000e to 2000e-17 (1994).Google Scholar
Title IX of the Education Amendment Act of 1972, 20 U.S.C. § 1681..Google Scholar
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Guidelines on Sexual Harassment, 29 C.F.R. § 1604.11..Google Scholar
Proposed Equal Rights Amendment, H.R.J. Res. 208, 92d Cong., 1st Sess., 86 Stat. 1523 (1971).Google Scholar
Articles 222-33; 225–1. Code Pénal. (1999). 12th edition. H. Pelletier & J. Perfetti. (eds.) Paris: Litec.Google Scholar
Articles L. 122-12; L. 122-34; L. 122-47; L. 123-1; L. 123-7; L. 152-1-1. Code du Travail 2000. (2000). B. Teyssie (ed.) Paris: Litec.Google Scholar
Loi N° 92-1179 du 2 novembre 1992 relative à l'abus d'autorite en matière sexuelle dans les relations de travail et modifiant le code du travail et le code de procedure pénale. Journal Officiel de la République Français. November 4 1992. p. 15255.Google Scholar
Loi N° 98-468 du 17 juin 1998 relative à a prévention et à la répression des infractions sexueles ainsi qu'à la protections des mineurs. Journal Officiel de la République Français. June 17 1998. pp. 9255–9263.Google Scholar
Loi N° 2000-493 du 6 juin 2000 tendant à favoriser l'égal accès des femmes et des hommes aux mandats électoraux et fonctions élective. Journal Officiel de la République Français. June 7 2000. pp. 8560–8562.Google Scholar
Council Directive of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions (76/207/EEC). Official Journal L 039, 14/02/1976 p. 40–42.Google Scholar
Commission Recommendation for November 1991 on the protection of the dignity of women and men at work (92/131/EEC). Official Journal L 049, 24/02/1992 p. 1–8.Google Scholar
Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub. L. 102–166, § 102, 105 Stat. 1071, 1072 (1991) (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1981a (1994)).Google Scholar
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § § 2000e to 2000e-17 (1994).Google Scholar
Title IX of the Education Amendment Act of 1972, 20 U.S.C. § 1681..Google Scholar
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Guidelines on Sexual Harassment, 29 C.F.R. § 1604.11..Google Scholar
Proposed Equal Rights Amendment, H.R.J. Res. 208, 92d Cong., 1st Sess., 86 Stat. 1523 (1971).Google Scholar
Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub. L. 102–166, § 102, 105 Stat. 1071, 1072 (1991) (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1981a (1994)).Google Scholar
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § § 2000e to 2000e-17 (1994).Google Scholar
Title IX of the Education Amendment Act of 1972, 20 U.S.C. § 1681..Google Scholar
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Guidelines on Sexual Harassment, 29 C.F.R. § 1604.11..Google Scholar
Proposed Equal Rights Amendment, H.R.J. Res. 208, 92d Cong., 1st Sess., 86 Stat. 1523 (1971).Google Scholar
Articles 222-33; 225–1. Code Pénal. (1999). 12th edition. H. Pelletier & J. Perfetti. (eds.) Paris: Litec.Google Scholar
Articles L. 122-12; L. 122-34; L. 122-47; L. 123-1; L. 123-7; L. 152-1-1. Code du Travail 2000. (2000). B. Teyssie (ed.) Paris: Litec.Google Scholar
Loi N° 92-1179 du 2 novembre 1992 relative à l'abus d'autorite en matière sexuelle dans les relations de travail et modifiant le code du travail et le code de procedure pénale. Journal Officiel de la République Français. November 4 1992. p. 15255.Google Scholar
Loi N° 98-468 du 17 juin 1998 relative à a prévention et à la répression des infractions sexueles ainsi qu'à la protections des mineurs. Journal Officiel de la République Français. June 17 1998. pp. 9255–9263.Google Scholar
Loi N° 2000-493 du 6 juin 2000 tendant à favoriser l'égal accès des femmes et des hommes aux mandats électoraux et fonctions élective. Journal Officiel de la République Français. June 7 2000. pp. 8560–8562.Google Scholar
Articles 222-33; 225–1. Code Pénal. (1999). 12th edition. H. Pelletier & J. Perfetti. (eds.) Paris: Litec.Google Scholar
Articles L. 122-12; L. 122-34; L. 122-47; L. 123-1; L. 123-7; L. 152-1-1. Code du Travail 2000. (2000). B. Teyssie (ed.) Paris: Litec.Google Scholar
Loi N° 92-1179 du 2 novembre 1992 relative à l'abus d'autorite en matière sexuelle dans les relations de travail et modifiant le code du travail et le code de procedure pénale. Journal Officiel de la République Français. November 4 1992. p. 15255.Google Scholar
Loi N° 98-468 du 17 juin 1998 relative à a prévention et à la répression des infractions sexueles ainsi qu'à la protections des mineurs. Journal Officiel de la République Français. June 17 1998. pp. 9255–9263.Google Scholar
Loi N° 2000-493 du 6 juin 2000 tendant à favoriser l'égal accès des femmes et des hommes aux mandats électoraux et fonctions élective. Journal Officiel de la République Français. June 7 2000. pp. 8560–8562.Google Scholar
Council Directive of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions (76/207/EEC). Official Journal L 039, 14/02/1976 p. 40–42.Google Scholar
Commission Recommendation for November 1991 on the protection of the dignity of women and men at work (92/131/EEC). Official Journal L 049, 24/02/1992 p. 1–8.Google Scholar
Council Directive of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions (76/207/EEC). Official Journal L 039, 14/02/1976 p. 40–42.Google Scholar
Commission Recommendation for November 1991 on the protection of the dignity of women and men at work (92/131/EEC). Official Journal L 049, 24/02/1992 p. 1–8.Google Scholar