性骚扰:不同种族和民族的不同标准

M. Marmo, Hervé Queneau
{"title":"性骚扰:不同种族和民族的不同标准","authors":"M. Marmo, Hervé Queneau","doi":"10.2190/HRHT-AK1X-5E55-1M9Y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To date, the courts have experienced considerable difficulty in determining what constitutes a sexually hostile work environment. Although the courts have not agreed on whether to use a reasonable-person or a reasonable-woman standard in deciding whether a sexually hostile work environment exists, our article raises a further complication: Should the courts also consider the ethnicity and race of the harassed person, because perceptions of sexual harassment also depend on these characteristics? Our article suggests that applying different standards based on the harassed person’s race/ethnicity is neither legally effective nor socially desirable. We argue that the most legally appropriate and socially desirable standard by which to judge sexual harassment cases is a modified reasonable-person standard that takes into account the relevant individual and group characteristics of the person allegedly harassed. To date, the courts have experienced considerable difficulty in determining what constitutes a sexually hostile work environment. The major issue the courts have faced in this regard is whether to use the “reasonable-person” or “reasonable-woman” standard when making this determination [1, 2]. In the case of Ellison vs. Brady, for example, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said that “in evaluating the severity and pervasiveness of sexual harassment, we should focus on the perspective of the victim” [3, at 626]. As the court continued, “a complete understanding of the victim’s view requires, among other things, an analysis of the","PeriodicalId":371129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Individual Employment Rights","volume":"213 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sexual Harassment: Different Standards for Different Racial and Ethnic Groups\",\"authors\":\"M. Marmo, Hervé Queneau\",\"doi\":\"10.2190/HRHT-AK1X-5E55-1M9Y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"To date, the courts have experienced considerable difficulty in determining what constitutes a sexually hostile work environment. Although the courts have not agreed on whether to use a reasonable-person or a reasonable-woman standard in deciding whether a sexually hostile work environment exists, our article raises a further complication: Should the courts also consider the ethnicity and race of the harassed person, because perceptions of sexual harassment also depend on these characteristics? Our article suggests that applying different standards based on the harassed person’s race/ethnicity is neither legally effective nor socially desirable. We argue that the most legally appropriate and socially desirable standard by which to judge sexual harassment cases is a modified reasonable-person standard that takes into account the relevant individual and group characteristics of the person allegedly harassed. To date, the courts have experienced considerable difficulty in determining what constitutes a sexually hostile work environment. The major issue the courts have faced in this regard is whether to use the “reasonable-person” or “reasonable-woman” standard when making this determination [1, 2]. In the case of Ellison vs. Brady, for example, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said that “in evaluating the severity and pervasiveness of sexual harassment, we should focus on the perspective of the victim” [3, at 626]. As the court continued, “a complete understanding of the victim’s view requires, among other things, an analysis of the\",\"PeriodicalId\":371129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Individual Employment Rights\",\"volume\":\"213 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Individual Employment Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2190/HRHT-AK1X-5E55-1M9Y\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Individual Employment Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2190/HRHT-AK1X-5E55-1M9Y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

迄今为止,法院在确定什么构成性敌对的工作环境方面遇到了相当大的困难。虽然法院尚未就是否使用“理性人”或“理性女性”标准来决定是否存在性敌意的工作环境达成一致,但我们的文章提出了一个更复杂的问题:法院是否也应该考虑被骚扰者的种族和种族,因为对性骚扰的看法也取决于这些特征?我们的文章表明,基于被骚扰者的种族/民族采用不同的标准既没有法律效力,也不受社会欢迎。我们认为,判断性骚扰案件的最合法、最受社会欢迎的标准是一种经过修改的合理人标准,该标准考虑了涉嫌被骚扰者的相关个人和群体特征。迄今为止,法院在确定什么构成性敌对的工作环境方面遇到了相当大的困难。法院在这方面面临的主要问题是,在做出这一决定时,是使用“通情达理的人”还是“通情达理的女人”的标准[1,2]。例如,在埃里森诉布雷迪案中,第九巡回上诉法院表示,“在评估性骚扰的严重性和普遍性时,我们应该关注受害者的视角”[3,at 626]。正如法院继续说的那样,“要完全理解受害者的观点,除其他事项外,还需要分析
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sexual Harassment: Different Standards for Different Racial and Ethnic Groups
To date, the courts have experienced considerable difficulty in determining what constitutes a sexually hostile work environment. Although the courts have not agreed on whether to use a reasonable-person or a reasonable-woman standard in deciding whether a sexually hostile work environment exists, our article raises a further complication: Should the courts also consider the ethnicity and race of the harassed person, because perceptions of sexual harassment also depend on these characteristics? Our article suggests that applying different standards based on the harassed person’s race/ethnicity is neither legally effective nor socially desirable. We argue that the most legally appropriate and socially desirable standard by which to judge sexual harassment cases is a modified reasonable-person standard that takes into account the relevant individual and group characteristics of the person allegedly harassed. To date, the courts have experienced considerable difficulty in determining what constitutes a sexually hostile work environment. The major issue the courts have faced in this regard is whether to use the “reasonable-person” or “reasonable-woman” standard when making this determination [1, 2]. In the case of Ellison vs. Brady, for example, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said that “in evaluating the severity and pervasiveness of sexual harassment, we should focus on the perspective of the victim” [3, at 626]. As the court continued, “a complete understanding of the victim’s view requires, among other things, an analysis of the
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信