Victimization in the U.S. Military: The Impact of Labeling Events on Officially Reporting Sexual Harassment

Abstract

We analyzed the extent to which type and labeling of harassment have an impact on reporting through official channels. Reinforcing earlier analyses, type of harassment impacted whether individuals reported incidents officially. Environmental harassment was far more likely to be reported through official channels. We speculate that "individualized" forms of harassment (personal, frequently directly physical in nature, leaving little room for misinterpretation by the victim or the perpetrator) may create a negative organizational image and therefore be more likely to be concealed. Since experiencing environmental harassment is strongly related to experiencing individualized harassment and is more likely to be reported through official channels, it may be the real key to creating zero-tolerance for any type of sexual harassment.Keywords: Victimization, Sexual Harassment, Environmental Harassment, Individualized Harassment, Reporting Harassment, U. S. Military Research ISSN 1948-5468 2010 www.macrothink.org/jsr 2 Journal of Sociological IntroductionThree basic theoretical perspectives have been used to understand sexual harassment. The biological perspective suggests that men and women are naturally attracted to each other and that in order to maximize their reproductive potential, males should engage in sexually aggressive behaviors because if their advances are accepted they increase the likelihood of creating offspring (Tangri & Hayes, 1997). Women, on the other hand, have a higher investment in reproduction and nurturing their offspring and would be less likely to behave in sexually aggressive ways (Tangri & Hayes, 1997). Thus a situation becomes defined as harassment only if the woman is not receptive to the sexual behavior (Tangri & Hayes, 1997). The socio-cultural perspective focuses on differential sex role socialization of men and women (Firestone & Harris, 1994; Tangri & Hayes, 1997; Terpstra & Baker, 1986; Whatley & Wasieleski, 2001). Sexual harassment is consistent with the socially accepted roles of dominant and aggressive men and submissive and subordinate women (this also helps explain the reluctance to believe that men are harassed).The organizational perspective focuses on individual power -those with more power can (and often do) make harassing demands on those with less power (Terpstra & Baker, 1986). Research indicates that most harassment is perpetrated by co-workers rather than superiors (Firestone & Harris, 1994;1999) which seems inconsistent with this perspective. However, as Thacker (1996) notes, individuals with less organizational status may display power through their personalities or by controlling critical information; thus harassment may appear to be less threatening to observers when perpetrated by co-workers but may appear equally severe to targets.One reason for the continued extent of harassment may be the problems associated with reporting incidences. A number of myths about sexual harassment reinforce difficulties in reporting, particularly within formal organizationa...

“Unwanted” and “bad,” but not “sexual”

“…Cortina and Leskinen, 2013;Harned, 2004;Magley et al, 1999). On the other hand, this non-labeling is seen as a reason for the low formal reporting rates of incidents of sexual harassment (Harris and Firestone, 2010;Fitzgerald et al, 1995) which can lead to many strategies such as laws and policies aimed at combating the issue not being effective or properly utilized. An array of scholarly research, predominantly in the west, has attempted to understand reasons for this non-labeling, especially during the 1990s (O' Leary-Kelly et al, 2009).…”

Testing Relationships between Sex of Respondent, Sexual Harassment and Intentions to Reenlist in the U.S. Military

“…Respondents were classified as having experienced individualistic or environmental unwanted, uninvited sexual behavior, or any form, (individualistic, environmental, or both; Note 2). The individual and environmental dimensions have been supported through principle components factor analysis with varimax rotation (Firestone & Harris, 2009;Harris & Firestone, 2010).…”

“…The military is no exception to this problem (Firestone & Harris, 1994, 1999Harris & Firestone, 1996, 1997, 2010Miller, 1997). Even if current emphasis on sexual harassment has legitimized claims and thereby increased complaints, the high proportion of respondents still alleging harassment suggests that policies may need better implementation and enforcement (Firestone & Harris, 2004).…”

“…First, organizational cohesion is very highly valued within the military; thus divulging negative information about a fellow soldier is considered taboo (Rosen & Martin, 1997). It is well established that men and women have different definitions about what actions become defined as intimidating, hostile, or offensive (Katz, Hannon, & Whitten, 1996;Saal, 1996), and that only individuals who define a situation as sexual harassment will report it (Harris & Firestone, 2010;Malovich & Stake, 1990). Indeed those behaviors accepted as typical social interactions within a particular environment are much less likely to be viewed as sexual harassment and most likely to be viewed differently by men and women (Fitzgerald & Shullman, 1993;Thomas, 1995;Uggen & Blackstone, 2004).…”

“…individualized or environmental -see Firestone & Harris, 1994) may also impact whether individuals are willing to commit to a future association. Importantly, Firestone and Harris have repeatedly found that when no general "environmental" types of harassment are reported, specific "individualized" harassment is extremely rare (Firestone & Harris, 1994, 1999Harris & Firestone, 1997, 2010.…”