Cultural Differences in Perceptions of and Responses to Sexual Harassment

INTRODUCTION I. HISTORY OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT LEGISLATION II. EXAMPLES OF DIFFERING CULTURAL VIEWPOINTS REGARDING SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND PERCEPTION OF THE HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT A. Brazil as an Example of South American Culture B. Europe C. Asia III. MAJOR MODELS OF CROSS-CULTURAL UNDERSTANDING APPLIED TO SEXUAL HARASSMENT IV. THE DOCTRINE OF ORDERED LIBERTY AS APPLICABLE TO THE PERCEPTION OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT V. THE LEGAL RELEVANCE OF CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY RESEARCH IN SEXUAL HARASSMENT PERCEPTION AND REPORTING: EDUCATION, LITIGATION, AND POLICY A. Education B. Litigation C. Policy and Standards CONCLUSION INTRODUCTION Globalization continues to fuel multiculturalism and diversity in the workplace, and few employers can afford to ignore the culturally-based experiences that their employees bring to their work lives. (1) In this context, sexual harassment must be understood in terms of cross-cultural perspectives. Even within a single culture, the definition of sexual harassment is often misunderstood and is the subject of considerable debate in legal, psychological, and human resource management literature, both domestically and abroad. (2) Defining the concept of sexual harassment becomes even "more complex and controversial in multicultural environments where culturally-derived values and beliefs serve as norms that determine when certain behaviors and feelings are appropriate and when they are not. " (3) Whether employees perceive workplace conduct--particularly ambiguous conduct--to be sexually harassing will be influenced by their respective cultural backgrounds. Similarly, an employer's response to such conduct and the manner in which it deals with the resultant issues will be influenced by cultural determinants. In order to demonstrate the consequences of viewing sexual harassment from a cross-cultural perspective, these cultural factors must be evaluated in the context of at least three major areas related to sexual harassment law and policy: (1) education in diversity, for both managers and employees; (2) application of cultural psychology research to those court cases in which it is relevant; and (3) reconsideration of the policies and standards applied to individual recipients from differing cultural backgrounds who are alleged victims of sexual harassment. I. HISTORY OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT LEGISLATION Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the foundation for sexual harassment claims. Yet Title VII was written long before the concept of sexual harassment was clearly defined or recognized as worthy of the significant concern we afford the issue today. (4) Section 703(a)(2) of the Civil Rights Act provides: It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual's . sex . (5) The framers of section 703 sought to "ensure . gender equality in hiring, firing, pay, promotion, and education opportunities. " (6) Indeed, "[t]hey were not thinking of sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination. " (7) While sexually exploitive and harassing behavior in the workplace clearly predates the Civil Rights Act, the notion that such behavior constituted actionable discrimination under Title VII did not develop until the 1970s--a decade marked by rising percentages of women in the workforce and strengthening of the women's movement. (8) Still, early cases arguing for relief from sexual harassment under a theory of sex discrimination were generally unsuccessful until 1977, when the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held in Barnes v. Costle that the retaliation for refusal of sexual favors constituted discrimination "because of . …