Exploring Sexual Harassment: A Detailed Literature Review on Workplace

This literature review explores the pervasive issue of sexual harassment in the workplace, highlighting its various forms, including quid pro quo and hostile work environments. It examines the evolution of legal definitions and the challenges in addressing gender harassment, which includes verbal and non-verbal behaviors that create an insulting or degrading environment for women. The review also discusses the limitations of current sexual harassment laws, suggesting that they sometimes place the burden of tolerance on women rather than eliminating the discriminatory behavior. Furthermore, it delves into theories explaining the causes of sexual harassment, such as the Illinois model and Pryor’s person by situation model, emphasizing the role of organizational climate and individual perceptions. The review also touches on the broader issue of street harassment and its connection to rape culture, underscoring the need for comprehensive efforts to ensure women's safety and well-being in both professional and public spaces.

Running head: SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN WORKPLACE
SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN WORKPLACE
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note:

1SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN WORKPLACE
Literature review
In the recent years, sexual harassment in the workplace has emerged in large number.
Since 1980 when sexual harassment was declared as a violation of the act, it has been a struggle
for the court to determine the exact acts that would be called sexual harassment. It is important to
eliminate sexual harassment from a workplace for women safety purpose. An unwelcomed
behaviour of sexual nature is called sexual harassment. Sexual harassment comes in types; quid
pro quo and hostile working environment. The quid pro quo is a direct proposal where the
employer is straightforward about his intention with the employee, the employee needs to agree,
or the employee might lose his job. The hostile working environment is an indirect way where
harassment is done through jokes, physical interference with movement, improper interaction or
sexually derogatory comments (Apodaca & Kleiner, 2001).
According to Leskinen, Cortina, and Kabat (2011, gender harassment can be in verbal as
well as non-verbal behaviour. This kind of behaviours is the insulting, hostile and degrading
attitude towards women. Gender harassment is a serious issue and can cause negative personal
outcomes as well as professional outcomes. The author strongly believes that there is a case that
is for interpreting the existing legislation including gender harassment. Nine out of ten women
have faced sexual harassment in her conducted research sample. The data analyzed of the authors
from the two male-dominated environments: the US military- 9,725 women and the federal-
1,425 women. The data shows five profiles of harassment, which are, low victimization, high
victimization, gender harassment, gender harassment with unwanted sexual attention, moderate
victimization. Among the mentioned five it the low victimization and gender harassment that

2SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN WORKPLACE
includes 90 percent of harassment victim that do not describe any sexual advances however the
most common form of sex-based harassment.
According to Yuille (2015), sexual harassment law is teaching a biased lesson. Instead of
providing liberation to women, the law is asking women to be acceptable to harassment. In the
law there exist a limitation in the freedom of women and therefore it is asking the women to
become tolerant of the harassment. However, the problem is not the law per se, it is the
pedagogical form that the law takes. The law has not failed to eliminate gender discrimination
due to the improper law or implication of law. The problem of sexual harassment is beyond the
law’s scope; however, the solution is to create dialogical methods for law where the victims can
decide the precise behaviour that is considered as sexual harassment.
The issues of sexual harassment are gaining concern and there rise the question, why
sexual harassment happens. Two theories are incorporated into a general model which gives
reasons to why sexual harassment happens. The Illinois model and Pryor’s person by the
situation are the two theories that have answered the question mentioned earlier. The perception
of men of an organization’s climate for harassment, the perception of men for the sexual
behaviour, men’s perception of other men’s sexual behaviour and other men’s general behaviour
in the workplace has an impact on the way women receive sexual harassment. Often found, men
taking the initiative to stop the other men from harassing women in the workplace helps to
eliminate sexual harassment from the organization. Also, some factors let the women decide
whether she is harassed or not, usually involving her level of tolerance or her experiences (Hurt,
2000).

3SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN WORKPLACE
Sexual harassment is not only in the workplace but also in the street. The rape culture has
increased in recent days and it is the centre of attraction in the sociologists’ perception. Women
are faced with a different form of harassment in the street followed by the action of rape.
Therefore an effective effort has been conducted by the activist and journalists to bring forth the
problem. With all the research it is also found that street harassment and fear of rape are
interrelated and to make an environment where women need to feel safe, both the concern needs
attention.

4SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN WORKPLACE
References:
Apodaca, E., & Kleiner, B. H. (2001). Sexual harassment in the business
environment. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 21, 3–13.
Hurt, J. L. (2000). Why harassment happens at work: Theoretical developments of the
antecedents of sexual harassment.
Leskinen, E. A., Cortina, L. M., & Kabat, D. B. (2011). Gender Harassment: Broadening Our
Understanding of Sex-Based Harassment at Work. Law and Human Behavior, 35(1), 25–
39.
Logan, L. S. (2013). FEAR OF VIOLENCE AND STREET HARASSMENT:
ACCOUNTABILITY AT THE INTERSECTIONS.
Yuille, L. K. (2015). Liberating Sexual Harassment Law. Michigan Journal of Gender &
Law, 22(2), 345–412.