The first type is known as "quid pro quo" harassment and it occurs when someone in power, such as a supervisor or a professor, promises or denies something in exchange for sexual favors. For example, if a boss tells his secretary he will give her a promotion if she sleeps with him, that would qualify as quid pro quo sexual harassment. or, if a professor tells a student that if she doesn't sleep with him, he will give her an F. For the course, this would also qualify as quid pro quo sexual harassment.
The second type of sexual harassment is known as "hostile environment" sexual harassment. This involves a pattern of behavior that creates a hostile environment in which an individual feels uncomfortable working. For example, a woman working in an office where all of the men have Playboy centerfolds hanging over their desks could be considered a hostile environment if she asks them to remove them and they refuse to comply. Once again, the actions have to be both unwelcome and offensive. It must also "unreasonably interfere with an individual's work performance" (Gordon 11).
Although most of the time it is women that bring charges of sexual harassment, the offense is not limited to women. Men can be victims of sexual harassment as well. Male or female, there are certain actions that need to be taken to effectively prove a case of sexual harassment. The first step is to immediately notify your employer (unless obviously it is your employer doing the harassing). If you are student being harassed you need to contact an administrative office designated to deal with discrimination and sexual harassment. These vary by university as to what they are called but information should be readily available on campus. If the authority you report the sexual harassment to fails to investigate and/or take appropriate action, then it is time to contact a lawyer. You must, however, at quickly because the longer you delay the process, the less likely you are to win your case (Gordon, 2007).
A recent case at a university demonstrated that sexual...
In the case of DeJohn vs. Temple University, a student at Temple University filed suit claiming that the university's sexual harassment policy was too restrictive and consequently violated the first amendment right to free speech. The court sided with the plaintiff, referring to the First Amendment's "overbreadth principle," which asserts that states are not allowed to pass laws that are too broad and do not define specifically what is prohibited. According to Sarabyn (2008) "The opinion provides an eloquent defense of free speech rights on university campuses and concludes with an unambiguous finding that Temple's speech code is facially unconstitutional."
Considering the multitude of court cases that have been filed over the years, one would think that all of the possible ambiguities related to sexual harassment would be cleared up by now. Unfortunately, that is simply not the case. Confusion over the laws of sexual harassment continues to persist, and although training programs cannot solve the problem entirely, they can certainly help make the situation clearer to a lot of people who desperately need clarification.
WORKS CITED
Gordon, Linda Howard, the Sexual Harassment Handbook, Career Press, 2007. Print.
Orlov, Darlene and Roumell, Michael T., What Every Manager Needs to Know About Sexual Harassment, AMACOM/American Management Association, 2005. Print.
Saguy, Abigail, What Is Sexual Harassment?: From Capitol Hill to the Sorbonne, University of California Press. 2003. Print
Sarabyn, Kelly "Victory for Free Speech in DeJohn v. Temple," Fire's the Torch, (August 4, 2008) Web. http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/9574.html
Siegel, R.B. And MacKinnon, Catherine, Directions in Sexual Harassment Law, New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press, 2004
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Facts About Sexual Harassment. Web. http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-sex.html
