chapter 5
RAPE AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT AROUND THE WORLD

It went on for hours. I don't know how many policemen came through the room. It could have been fifty. I will never forget their laughter, their shouting. I cried, I prayed, I asked God why me, a respectable woman, a grandmother, who had never known any man's body except my husband's.

—Ahmedi Begum, a Pakistani woman

Historically, because women have been viewed as the possessions of their fathers and husbands, sexual abuse of a woman has been considered a violation of a man's property rights rather than a violation of a woman's human rights. However, primarily through the efforts of women's advocacy groups worldwide, rape is no longer viewed as a violation of family honor but as an abuse and violation of women. In most countries, rape is now considered a crime. In 1993, the United Nations' (UN) Declaration of the Eradication of Violence against Women (UN Resolution 49/104, December 1993) specifically named marital rape, sexual abuse of female children, selling women into slavery or prostitution, and other acts of sexual violence against women in its condemnation of "any act of gender-based violence that results in or is likely to result in physical, sexual, or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion, or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or private life."

In many countries, only women of "good character" can demand protection from rape. In some Latin American countries, the law only recognizes rape of chaste women. These attitudes are generally based on the definition of rape as the defilement of a virgin. In the past, the traditional legal recourse required the offender to compensate the girl's father for her lost value in the marriage market.

Pakistan has perhaps the harshest attitudes toward rape in the world. The country's Hudood Ordinances, passed in 1979 as part of an Islamic overhaul of the country's law to deal with a range of sins, effectively equate rape with adultery. Any sex outside of marriage, known as zina, is against the law. This view often results in the arrest of raped women rather than their rapists. In a Karachi court, about 15% of the rape trials result in women facing charges and imprisonment. In one case, a patient and his two friends raped a staff nurse in a Karachi prison. Although she did not go to police, the men reported her for engaging in sex outside marriage. The judge found that if she were a "decent" woman she would not work at night and sentenced her to five years in prison, five lashes, and a fine equivalent to a year's salary.

According to Majida Rizvi, head of the Pakistani National Commission on the Status of Women, up to 80% of all women in Pakistani jails are there on charges of violating the Hudood Ordinances—many because they were raped. Once in police custody, about 72% are raped again, this time by the police. Human Rights Watch, an independent, nongovernmental organization dedicated to investigating and exposing human rights violations worldwide, estimates that at least 1,500 Pakistani women are in prison on charges of zina.

Under the Hudood Ordinances, four Muslim men must witness penetration and testify to rape; if no witnesses are produced, the women are subject to prosecution for zina. In 2002, Zafran Bibi was convicted of zina and sentenced to stoning to death under the ordinances, despite her claims that her brother-in-law had raped her. She was acquitted many months later by a higher Pakistani court after an international outcry.

The Pakistani patriarchal system sometimes leads to government-sanctioned abuses of women. On June 22, 2002, during a tribal council in Punjab, Pakistan, Salma Bibi, a thirty-year-old woman, was gang raped by four men in front of local villagers as punishment for her brother's sexual misconduct. Bibi claimed that her brother was also raped and that police demanded a bribe to release him from custody.

In a letter to Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf urging closer scrutiny of the role of tribal councils in the abuse of women, LaShawn R. Jefferson, the executive director of the Women's Rights Division of Human Rights Watch, wrote: "We also remain concerned about the broader role of tribal councils in Pakistan and the authority they effectively enjoy to mete out punishments properly reserved to the state. Human Rights Watch believes that it is imperative that government authorities ensure that tribal councils act in accordance with the law and in a manner that respects women's rights, and do not usurp the proper judicial authority of the state. We request that you identify mechanisms by which local administrations in Pakistan can monitor the conduct of tribal councils, and intervene in instances where they have exercised jurisdiction belonging to the state."

PURPOSES OF RAPE

Punitive rape is sometimes practiced in countries where men resent women taking initiative or assuming positions of authority or power. In Latin America, feminists contend that women are raped as a way to force them back into the traditional sphere of home and children. In India, a leader of the Women's Development Program, an organization that helps women start businesses, was gangraped in front of her husband by men who disapproved of her campaign against child marriages.

Rape is also practiced as a weapon of war or as a right of victorious forces—"spoils of war," as noted by Nancy Farwell in her "War Rape: New Conceptualizations and Responses" (Affilia, vol. 19, Winter 2004). Combatants and their sympathizers have raped women in wartime with near complete impunity. In 1993, for the first time, the UN passed a resolution identifying rape as a war crime. Documented cases of wartime rape have occurred in Sierra Leone, Kosovo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Afghanistan, Liberia, Rwanda, El Salvador, Guatemala, Kuwait, Bangladesh, the former Yugoslavia, and by U.S. troops in the Vietnam War. In Darfur, Sudan, rape has been used as a weapon of war by governmentsponsored militia known as Janjawid since 2003 ("Darfur: Rape as a Weapon of War: Sexual Violence and Its Consequences," Amnesty International, July 19, 2004, http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAFR540762004?open&of=ENG-373, accessed November 22, 2004).

There is little accurate information on rates of rape and sexual assault, especially in developing countries. The challenge of defining rape across cultures makes data collection difficult, and underreporting raises suspicion about the actual number of incidents. For example, a 1999 UN Children's Fund study found that from 1989 to 1997 reported rapes declined in all but three of the twelve countries for which data were available. This decline seems unlikely since during the same years there were sharp increases in all other crime statistics.

The Seventh United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (1998–2000) indicated that rapes were being reported as readily as other crimes. The survey is a major worldwide study conducted periodically by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/crime_cicp_survey_seventh.html, accessed November 22, 2004). It revealed that the total number of recorded rapes in the ninety-two countries that participated in the survey dropped 30% between 1999 and 2000. The total number of recorded crimes reported by those countries also dropped by 30% during the same period. In comparison, the total number of recorded rapes actually increased slightly, by 0.2% between 1998 and 1999, and the total number of recorded crimes similarly rose by 0.4%. This possibly indicates changes in the way countries defined and recorded crimes from one year to the next.

It also may reflect an unwillingness of governments and victims to report rape. The authors of Not a Minute More: Ending Violence against Women (The United Nations Women's Development Fund, 2003, http://www.unifem.org/filesconfirmed/207/312_book_complete_eng.pdf, accessed November 22, 2004) notes that reporting a rape is seen as a danger by victims, who may suffer further at the hands of police or their own families:

The stigma, disbelief, ridicule or retribution attached to speaking out makes it nearly impossible to obtain accurate national statistics on rape in many countries. Having suffered one trauma, many women do not want to undergo additional emotional pain at the hands of the police. According to the Philippines National Police, approximately two in ten rapes are reported. The rest are kept hidden; in many cases a woman's family discourages her from reporting the incident.

Rape and gender-based sexual assault are closely linked to suicide, prostitution, trafficking for sex, substance abuse, murder, high-risk and unintended pregnancy, HIV/AIDS, other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), and disability. Having suffered rape and sexual assault also increase an individual's utilization of health care services. One U.S. study found a history of rape or sexual assault to be a stronger predictor of using health care than any other factor—rape victims used two-and-a-half times more services than women who had not been raped.

MARITAL RAPE

It was very clear to me. He raped me. He ripped off my pajamas, he beat me up. I mean, some scumbag down the street would do that to me. So to me, it wasn't any different because I was married to him, it was rape—real clear what it was. It emotionally hurt worse. I mean you can compartmentalize it as stranger rape—you were at the wrong place at the wrong time. You can manage to get over it differently. But here, you're at homewith your husband and you don't expect that. I was under constant terror even if he didn't do it.

—A victim of marital rape

Rape has little to do with the sexual relations associated with love and marriage. Rape is an act of violence by one person against another. It is an act of power that aims to hurt at the most intimate level. Rape is a violation, whether it occurs at the hands of a stranger or within the home at the hands of an abusive husband or partner.

In the United States, state laws on marital rape vary. On July 5, 1993, marital rape became a crime in all fifty states. In thirty-three states, however, there are exemptions from prosecution if, for example, the husband did not use force or if the woman is legally unable to consent because of a severe disability. There is still a tendency in the legal system to consider marital rape far less serious than either stranger or acquaintance rape.

An analysis of data from the National Violence against Women Survey, sponsored jointly by the U.S. Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, estimated that 1.5 million women and 834,700 men are raped and/or physically assaulted by an intimate partner each year. Of all surveyed women age eighteen and older, 1.5% said they were raped and/or physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting partner, or date in the year preceding the interview, compared to 0.9% of all surveyed men. Of the women, 7.7% reported being raped by an intimate partner at some point in their lives. Although these estimates were developed in 1998, most researchers agree that these statistics are likely to remain unchanged until improved methods to respond to violence against women are instituted.

As previous reports have consistently shown, the National Violence against Women Survey reconfirms that violence against women is primarily intimate partner violence. More than three-quarters of women who were raped and/or physically assaulted from the age of eighteen were assaulted by a current or former husband, cohabiting partner, or date. Nine percent were assaulted by a relative other than a husband, and 17% were assaulted by an acquaintance, such as a friend, neighbor, or coworker. Rape or assault by a stranger accounted for only 14% of the incidents. By comparison, men were primarily raped and physically assaulted by strangers and acquaintances rather than by intimate partners.

Some researchers estimate that nearly two million marital rapes occur each year and that this form of rape is more common than both stranger and acquaintance rape. Although the legal definition varies from state to state, marital rape is generally defined as any sexual activity coerced from a wife unwilling to perform it. Research on marital rape indicates that 10% to 14% of married women have been raped by their partners and that marital rape accounts for about 25% of all rapes.

It is vitally important to recognize the limitations of available data about marital rape and intimate partner violence in general. In Intimate Partner Violence and Age of Victim, 1993–99 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, October 2001), Callie Rennison cautioned that marital status may relate directly to a survey respondent's willingness to reveal violence at the hands of an intimate partner or spouse. For example, a married woman may be afraid to report her husband as the offender or she may be in a state of denial—unable to admit to herself or others that her husband has victimized her.

In her landmark study Rape and Marriage (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1990), Diana Russell reported on interviews with a random sample of 930 women in the San Francisco area. Of all the women who had been married, 14% had been raped by their spouses at least once. Of this number, one-third reported being raped once; one-third reported between two and twenty incidents; and one-third said they had been raped by their spouses more than twenty times.

According to Russell, the first incident of rape usually occurred in the first year of marriage. Although marital rape occurred more frequently in spousal relationships where emotional and physical abuse were present, it could also happen in marriages where there was little other violence.

Raquel Kennedy Bergen in her book Wife Rape (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1996) reported data collected from detailed interviews with forty wife-rape victims. Fifty-five percent had been raped twenty times or more during their marriages, while 17% had experienced this abuse only once. Most of the women in the sample reported that their husbands felt a sense of ownership that granted them sexual rights to their bodies. Because of this perceived entitlement, the men did not interpret their behavior as rape. Several women also believed that the abuse was an attempt to punish them and that the rape was an attempt to control and assert power.

Marital Rape Categories

Louis J. Shiro and Kersti Yllöo, in the Maine State Bar Association Bar Bulletin (vol. 19, no. 5, September 1985), observed that there is no single accurate depiction of marital rape—it is no more accurate to assume that marital rape is always a savage attack than to assume it is just a sexual tiff. Both scenarios are part of a spectrum. The researchers developed three broad categories based on their interviews with fifty assault victims: battering rapes, force-only rapes, and obsessive rapes.

About 45% of the women in this study suffered battering rapes. In these rapes, the batterer used sexual assault as another brutal form of abuse against his wife. Because of the particularly demeaning and degrading nature of some of the acts, this violent behavior appeared more brutal than other violence the abuser may have perpetrated on his wife. The battering rapist was characterized as often angry and suffering from alcohol abuse or another substance abuse problem.

Nonbattering, force-only rape, which involved about 45% of the cases, generally occurred in middle-class marriages where there was much less history of violence and abuse. The immediate reason for the rape was often a specifically sexual reason—for example, how often to have sex and the kind of sex the husband desired. The force used was much more restrained; it was enough to force intercourse but not enough to cause severe injury. This type of rape, Shiro and Yllöo observed, is not so much an instrument of anger as a tool to establish power or control or to "teach a lesson."

About 10% of the women interviewed described rapes the researchers categorized as obsessive marital rape. In these instances, the husband had very unusual, often deviant sexual demands that sometimes involved other men or violence that the wife was refusing to fulfill. This type of rapist was frequently found to be heavily involved in pornography.

How Is Aggression Related to Marital Rape?

Since marital rape frequently occurs in relationships plagued by other types of abusive behavior, some researchers view it as just another expression of intimate partner violence. Support for this idea comes from research documenting high rates of forced sex, ranging from 34% to 57%, reported by married women in battered women's shelters. Still, research has not conclusively demonstrated whether husbands who engage in physical and psychological violence will be more likely to use threatened or forced sex.

Amy Marshall and Amy Holtzworth-Munroe investigated the relationship between two forms of sexual aggression—coerced and threatened/forced sex—and husbands' physical and psychological aggressiveness. They reported their findings in "Varying Forms of Husband Sexual Aggression: Predictors and Subgroup Differences" (Journal of Family Psychology, vol. 16, no. 3, September 2002).

Marshall and Holtzworth-Munroe interviewed 164 couples and evaluated husbands using their own selfreports and their wives' reports on three measures: the revised Conflict Tactics Scale, a questionnaire called the Sexual Experiences Survey, and the Psychological Maltreatment of Women Inventory, a fifty-eight-item measure of psychological abuse. The researchers found that the most severely physically violent men most often used sexual coercion, while physical aggression was most predictive of threatened/forced sex. Husbands who were rated as generally violent/antisocial engaged in the most threatened/forced sex. Interestingly, even the subtype of physically nonviolent men was found to have engaged in some sexual coercion in the year preceding the study.

Marshall and Holtzworth-Munroe concluded that their findings underscore the need to consider sexual aggression as a form of intimate partner abuse. They also called for research to determine the extent to which sexual coercion precedes and predicts threatened/forced sex and whether this association holds true for all relationships or only for those relationships in which there are other forms of marital violence.

The Effects of Marital Rape

Contrary to the traditional belief that victims of marital rape suffer few or no consequences, research reveals that women may suffer serious long-term medical and psychological consequences from this form of abuse. In her review of the relevant research Marital Rape (Applied Research Forum, National Electronic Network on Violence against Women, http://www.vawnet.org/DomesticViolence/Research/VAWnetDocs/AR_mrape.php, March 1999), Raquel Kennedy Bergen reported raperelated genital injuries, such as lacerations (tears), soreness, bruising, torn muscles, fatigue, vomiting, unintended pregnancy, and infection with sexually transmitted diseases. Victims who had been battered before, during, or after the rape suffered broken bones, black eyes, bloody noses, and knife wounds, as well as injuries sustained when they were kicked, punched, or burned.

The short-term psychological effects are similar to those experienced by other victims of sexual assault and include anxiety, shock, intense fear, suicidal thinking, depression, and post–traumatic stress disorder. But marital rape victims reportedly suffer higher rates of anger and depression than women raped by strangers, perhaps because the violence was perpetrated by a person they had loved and trusted to not harm them. Long-term consequences include serious depression, sexual problems, and emotional pain that lasts years after the abuse. And J. A. Bennice et al. found that marital rape survivors were more likely than other battered women to suffer the debilitating effects of post–traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), even when controlling for the severity of the beatings. They reported their findings in "The Relative Effects of Intimate Partner Physical and Sexual Violence on PTSD Symptomatology" (Violence and Victims, vol. 18, no. 1, 2003).

As is true with other violent acts, marital rape prompts some women to leave their rapist husbands. Kennedy Bergen reported that women from selected ethnic groups, such as Latinas, appeared less likely to characterize forced sex as rape and consequently less likely to accuse or flee their spouses. The fact that married women do leave their abusers, however, was confirmed by an analysis of National Crime Victimization Surveys data that compared marital status of survey respondents from one survey to the next. Table 5.1 shows that 30% of the female victims of intimate partner violence who were married during the previous survey interview when they had reported being victimized had separated by the next year, and an additional 8% had divorced their husbands.

Attitudes about Wife Rape

Historically, wives were considered the property of the husband, and therefore, rape of a wife was viewed as impossible. No husband still living with his wife was prosecuted for marital rape in the United States until 1978—and at that time, marital rape was a crime in only five states, as reported by Jennifer A. Bennice and Patricia A. Resick in "Marital Rape: History, Research, and Practice" (Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, vol. 4, no. 3, July 2003). By 1993, marital rape under some conditions was recognized in all fifty states.

However, public attitudes toward rape in marriage have been slow to change, with many people believing that marital rape is not "real rape." Researcher Kathleen Basile of Georgia State University in Atlanta sought to examine variables that might predict specific attitudes about wife rape: beliefs about the occurrence and frequency of forced sex by a husband on his wife and whether respondents would classify various scenarios as constituting rape. She reported her findings in "Attitudes Toward Wife Rape: Effects of Social Background and Victim Status" (Violence and Victims, vol. 17, no. 3, June 2002).

Nearly all previous attitudinal research had focused on limited populations, such as college students, and could not be generalized to the public at large. Basile chose to analyze data from a nationally representative telephone survey of 1,108 adults to produce more widely applicable findings.

Basile hypothesized that social background variables and victim status would predict how survey respondents felt about marital rape. Based on earlier research, she believed that males, blacks, and other racial minorities would express opinions more supportive of wife rape. Similarly, Basile expected that supportive attitudes would increase with age. She felt that victims and persons with higher educational attainment would hold less supportive views of wife rape.

Survey respondents were asked whether they "think husbands ever use force, like hitting, holding down, or using a weapon, to make their wives have sex when the wife doesn't want to" to find out if they thought wife rape occurs. Respondents who answered "yes" to this question were asked how often they thought this occurs to gauge their perceptions of the frequency of wife rape. They also

TABLE 5.1

listened to descriptions of three scenarios of forced sex: two scenarios involved forced sex between husband and wife and the other was a woman forced to have sex with someone with whom she was previously intimate. The respondents were asked whether they considered each scenario to be an instance of rape.

Basile found that nearly three-quarters (73%) of respondents believed that wife rape occurs, 18% thought it does not occur, and 5% were unsure. Among those who thought wife rape occurs, 38% said it happens often, and an additional 40% felt it happens somewhat often. Fifteen percent felt wife rape is infrequent and 4% said it is a rare occurrence.

Basile found support for nearly all her of hypotheses. The older the respondents, the less likely they were to believe that wife rape occurs, and white respondents were 2.5 times more likely to believe that wife rape occurs than blacks and other minorities. Women thought wife rape occurs more frequently than did men and, predictably, victims were more than twice as likely as nonvictims to feel that wife rape occurs.

The most surprising finding was that more education was associated with the belief that wife rape is less frequent. Basile observed that this finding might simply indicate that even persons with higher educational attainment remain ignorant about the frequency of wife rape.

Although Basile found that overall national attitudes about wife rape are less supportive than she would have predicted prior to her study, the variations in attitudes toward the two marital rape scenarios prompted her to observe that many Americans still feel victims play some part in their own victimization.

ACQUAINTANCE RAPE

According to a number of widely publicized studies, young women are at high risk of sexual assault by acquaintances or boyfriends. Studies have found rates ranging from a low of 15% for rape to a high of 78% for unwanted sexual aggression. Researchers surmise that acquaintance rape is especially underreported because the victims believe that nothing can or will be done, feel unsure about how to define the occurrence, or are uncertain about whether the action qualified as abuse.

Date rape is considered a form of acquaintance rape, especially if the perpetrator and victim have not known one another for long and the abuse begins early in the relationship. In "Adolescent Dating Violence and Date Rape" (Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 14, no. 5, October 2002), a review of the current research and literature about date rape, Vaughn I. Rickert, Roger D. Vaughan, and Constance M. Wiemann observed that female teens aged sixteen to nineteen years old and young adult women aged twenty to twenty-four are not only four times as likely to be raped as women of other ages, but also that teens who have experienced rape or attempted rape during adolescence are twice as likely to experience an additional assault when they are college aged.

Rickert, Vaughan, and Wiemann also focused on high-risk subgroups of adolescents that, although less often studied, appear to experience high rates of date rape and other dating violence. They cited academically underperforming teens as at high risk, with 67% of female students and 33% of male students in a high school dropout prevention program admitting to having perpetrated dating violence, including sexual abuse and rape.

Acts of Aggression

David Riggs and K. Daniel O'Leary, in their study "Aggression between Heterosexual Dating Partners" (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, vol. 11, no. 4, December 1996), analyzed questionnaires from 345 undergraduates and found that overall rates of aggression by men and women are quite similar. About one-third of both men and women report engaging in physical aggression in their current relationships, and nearly all have used at least one form of verbal aggression.

Men are somewhat more likely to use serious forms of aggression, while women are twice as likely to slap a partner and more than five times as likely to kick, hit, or bite. Women are more likely to engage in nearly all forms of verbal aggression. Riggs and O'Leary acknowledged that their research does not reveal how much of the aggression reported by women was in self-defense.

The Influence of Alcohol on Sexual Assault

Alcohol reduces inhibitions and, in some cases, enhances aggression, so it is not surprising that researchers examine the link between alcohol and sexual assault. In "Alcohol and Sexual Assault in a National Sample of College Women" (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, vol. 14, no. 6, June 1999), Sarah E. Ullman, George Karabatsos, and Mary P. Koss examined how drinking prior to an assault influenced the severity of the attack.

The researchers administered a questionnaire to 3,187 college-age women, more than half of whom had been victims of rape, attempted rape, unwanted sexual contact, or sexual coercion. They measured the participants' alcohol use, the severity of the sexual attack, the social context in which the assault occurred, and the victims' familiarity with the offenders. As expected, victims who reported getting drunk more often also reported more severe assaults than those who were drunk less often. Neither the victim's family income nor how well the victim knew the offender was related to the severity of the attack, although older women experienced more severe victimization.

The researchers also found that alcohol's role in predicting the severity of an attack did not vary according to how well the victim knew her attacker or whether a social situation, such as a party, was the setting for the assault—with one exception. Unplanned social situations were associated with more severe assaults when offenders were not drinking prior to the assault than when they were drinking. The victim's use of alcohol was related to the severity of the attack in cases where the rapist was not drinking. According to Ullman, Karabatsos, and Koss, this finding suggests that intoxicated victims may be targeted by offenders, who perceive an opportunity to engage in sex without using coercive behaviors.

As anticipated, the study found that victims who abused alcohol or offenders and victims who used alcohol prior to the attack suffered higher rates of severe assaults. The study also found that offender drinking was related to more aggressive offender behavior and more severe victimization, suggesting that more violent assaults occurred when assailants had been drinking. Conversely, victim drinking was related to less offender aggression, possibly because force was not needed to complete the rape of intoxicated victims.

Not all researchers agree that the use of alcohol by offenders increases the severity of sexual assaults. Leanne R. Brecklin and Sarah E. Ullman found that alcohol use of offenders did not affect victim physical injury or need for medical attention. They reported their findings in "The Role of Offender Alcohol Use in Rape Attacks: An Analysis of National Crime Victimization Survey Data" (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, vol. 16, no. 1, January 2001). They also found that alcohol use was related to less completed rape. They suggested, however, that alcohol use might be indirectly associated with injury outcomes, because offenders using alcohol were more likely to assault in more dangerous situations (assaulting at night and outdoors, and attacking strangers).

Sexual Coercion

Sexual coercion is any situation where one person uses verbal or physical methods to obtain sex or sexual activity without consent of the other. Two studies examining the frequency of sexual coercion in dating relationships were published in Violence and Victims, vol. 10, nos. 3–4, 1995.

The first, "Male and Female Sexual Victimization in Dating Relationships: Gender Differences in Coercion Techniques and Outcomes," by Lisa Waldner-Haugrud and Brian Magruder, found that a "phenomenal" amount of sexual coercion was reported by 422 college students. Only 17% of the females and 27% of the males reported never experienced any coercion. The most common coercion techniques experienced by both sexes were persistent touching and the use of alcohol and drugs. Together, these methods comprised more than half the reported incidents of coercion. Women were more likely to experience unwanted detainment, persistent touching, lies, and being held down.

In the second study, Michele Poitras and Francine Lavoie questioned 644 adolescents between fifteen and nineteen years of age. Their results were published as "A Study of Prevalence of Sexual Coercion in Adolescent Heterosexual Dating Relationships in a Quebec Sample." The most frequently occurring unwanted sexual experiences reported by the adolescents were kissing, petting, and fondling. Verbal coercion was the most frequently used technique. Two in five girls reported sexual contact resulting from verbal coercion, and one in five reported intercourse resulting from verbal coercion. Approximately one out of ten females reported intercourse resulting from the use of force, alcohol, or drugs. Boys rarely reported the use of force, although 2.3% reported that they had had sex after giving their partners drugs or alcohol, and 2.9% reported intercourse as a result of verbal coercion. Poitras and Lavoie speculated that some of the differences in the reported rates of girls as the recipients of coercion and boys inflicting it may be attributed to the fact that adolescent girls frequently date older men, who may be more likely than boys to engage in coercive behaviors.

Leah E. Adams-Curtis and Gordon B. Forbes complicate the view of sexual coercion in their review of research, "College Women's Experiences of Sexual Coercion" (Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, vol. 5, no. 2, April 2004). They argued that coercive sexual behavior must be understood within prevalent sexual values on college campuses, including attitudes toward women, beliefs about sexual behavior, rape-supporting beliefs, coercionsupporting

TABLE 5.2

peer groups like fraternities and athletic teams, gender concepts of both victims and perpetrators, and sexual promiscuity and its link with alcohol.

The researchers posited that sexual coercion has its roots in traditional sex roles and expectations. Perpetrators of sexual coercion are not psychopaths, but rather, men not particularly different from other men. Instead, the authors wrote, "We view sexual coercion as a complex, multiply determined, social behavior that has its origins in normal heterosexual interactions…. The factors influencing the progression from normal sexual negotiations to coercive sexuality are often commonplace elements of college life." The authors recommended that work be done to change traditional concepts of masculinity and femininity that result in the large percentages of college women being coerced into unwanted sexual activity.

College Rape

The National College Women Sexual Victimization study found a disturbingly high rate of rapes among college women. The study was based on a telephone survey of randomly selected, national sample of 4,446 women attending colleges and universities in fall 1996. Respondents were asked between late February and early May 1997 if they had experienced sexual victimization "since school began in fall 1996."

The study found that in that period of almost seven months, 2.8% of the women had experienced either an attempted or completed rape. (See Table 5.2.) The authors suggested that the data show that nearly 5% of women college students are victimized in a given calendar year, and that the percentage of attempted or completed rape victimizations of college women during their college careers approaches one in four. The authors concluded that although the 2.8% figure might "seem" low, "from a policy perspective,

TABLE 5.3

college administrators might be disturbed to learn that for every one thousand women attending their institutions, there may well be thirty-five incidents of rape in a given academic year. … For a campus with ten thousand women, this would mean the number of rapes would exceed 350."

Researchers also asked respondents about other types of sexual victimization. They found that 1.7% of their sample had been victims of completed sexual coercion (unwanted sexual penetration with the threat of punishment or promise of reward), 1.3% had been victims of attempted sexual coercion, 1.9% had been victims of unwanted completed sexual contact with force or the threat of force, and 1.8% had been victims of completed sexual contact without physical force. Smaller percentages of women had been sexually threatened. Table 5.3 shows these additional types of sexual victimization. Figure 5.1 displays the data slightly differently, showing that 7.7% of college women surveyed had experienced sexual victimization involving physical force, 11% had experienced sexual victimization involving nonphysical force, and 15.5% had experienced any victimization since the start of the academic year.

The National College Women Sexual Victimization study also found that fewer than 5% of the rapes and attempted rapes had been reported to police, and even lower percentages of other types of sexual victimization were reported. (See Table 5.4.) A national study of college students reported by the Centers for Disease Control backed up this result, finding that 27.5% of women said they had suffered rape or attempted rape at least once since age fourteen, but just 5% of victims reported the incidents to the police.

FIGURE 5.1

These numbers confirm other researchers' findings that students overwhelmingly do not report acquaintance rapes or attempted rapes, including those of Bonnie S. Fisher et al. in "Reporting Sexual Victimization to the Police and Others: Results from a National-Level Study of College Women" (Criminal Justice and Behavior, vol. 30, no. 1, February 2003). According to the Centers for Disease Control, the term "hidden rape" has been used to describe this finding of widespread unreported and underreported sexual assault. Anecdotal reports from college and university administrators suggest that many female students who have been raped not only fail to report the offense, but also drop out of school.

TABLE 5.4

In "Acquaintance Rape and the College Social Scene" (Family Relations, vol. 40, January 1991), Sally Ward et al. surveyed 518 women and 337 men at a large university. Thirty-four percent of the female respondents had experienced unwanted sexual contact, such as attempted or actual kissing, fondling, or touching; 20% had experienced unwanted attempted sexual intercourse; and 10% had unwanted intercourse, which was defined as any form of sexual penetration, including vaginal, anal, and oral. The majority of incidents were party related, and most involved alcohol, with 75% of the males and over half the females reporting alcohol consumption at the time of the incident.

Women reported that the majority of the perpetrators initiated the acts without warning. The percentage of cases involving force by men ranged from 8% for sexual contact to 21% for completed intercourse. Most of the women verbally protested, although 20% of victims said they were too frightened to protest. Victims most frequently chose to confide in a roommate or close friend, although 41% of the women told no one about the rape. Counselors were almost never told of the incidents.

The men reported a very different picture of unwanted sexual behavior on campus. Only 9% reported committing either unwanted sexual contact or attempted intercourse, and 3% admitted to incidents of unwanted sexual intercourse. Ward et al. proposed that the reason for the different results is that men and women read sexual cues and form sexual expectations differently. A 2003 study titled "Likelihood of Acquaintance Rape as a Function of Males' Sexual Expectations, Disappointment, and Adherence to Rape-Conducive Attitudes" found that men are far more likely than women to interpret a woman's behavior as sexual and misconstrue it as an invitation to sexual intimacy. The study's authors, V. J. Willan and Paul Pollard, wrote, "In conjunction with the finding that males significantly misperceived the female's sexual intent to engage in sexual intercourse, following the initial contact, this suggests that males, in a bid to calculate the probability of obtaining sexual intercourse, overestimate the predictive value of the female's initial consent to 'attend a party together.' This consequently leads to greater goal expectation, which, combined with hostile beliefs about women, might result in a greater likelihood of nonconsensual sexual intercourse" (Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, vol. 20, no. 5, 2003).

Fraternities and Athletics

Fraternity members are frequently blamed as perpetrators of college rapes. Martin Schwartz and Carol Nogrady, in "Fraternity Membership, Rape Myths, and Sexual Aggression on College Campus" (Violence against Women, vol. 2, no. 2, June 1996), think this characterization is false. They argue that men who are most likely to rape in college are fraternity pledges, and postulate that fraternity members are more likely to have a narrow conception of masculinity, espouse group secrecy, and sexually objectify women. Schwartz and Nogrady asserted that alcohol is the crucial variable, and because fraternity members are often heavy drinkers, researchers have mistakenly linked these men and sexually aggressive behavior.

Mary Koss and Hobart Cleveland, in "Athletic Participation, Fraternity Membership and Date Rape: The Question Remains—Self-Selection or Different Causal Processes?" (Violence against Women, vol. 2, no. 2, June 1996), tried to determine whether date rape is more likely to be perpetrated by athletes and fraternity members. They speculated that a fraternity-sponsored party draws acquaintances of the same social network together, while the fraternity controls the limited physical space with very little supervision. Together, these circumstances create an environment that legitimizes the actions of the members, thereby minimizing the chance of reporting as well as the credibility of women who do report sexual misconduct. Koss and Cleveland concluded that there is very low reporting of fraternity rape.

Several studies have found that peer support of violence and social ties with abusive peers are predictors of abuse against women. In addition, training for violent occupations such as athletics and the military can "spill over" into personal life. Athletic training is sex-segregated, promotes hostile attitudes toward rivals, and rewards athletes for physically dominating others. Todd Crosset et al. in "Male Student-Athletes and Violence against Women" (Violence against Women, vol. 2, no. 2, June 1996), gathered data from the judicial affairs offices of the ten Division I schools with the largest athletic programs. Although male student-athletes made up just 3% of the student population, they accounted for 35% of the reported perpetrators.

Crosset et al. contended that the special society of athletics promotes violent, woman-hating attitudes. In "Sports' Dirty Secret" (Sports Illustrated, vol 83, issue 5, July 31, 1995), Crosset explained that it is an important aspect of male athleticism to not be considered feminine, meaning a "wimp" or a "sissy." Women are despised, degraded, and not respected. In this climate, the athlete needs to "act like a man," and to be accused of acting like a woman is a grave insult.

Researchers Stephen E. Humphrey and Arnold S. Kahn have complicated the question of whether fraternity members and male athletes are more likely to perpetrate sexual assaults than other college males in "Fraternities, Athletic Teams, and Rape: Importance of Identification with a Risky Group" (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, vol. 15, December 2000). They argued that one reason that previous studies have yielded conflicting results is that they treat all sports teams and fraternities as the same, but that "there is evidence that fraternities vary widely in their attitudes toward women and their behavior toward them." They concluded that some "high-risk groups" had higher levels of sexual aggression and hostility toward women, as well as more support for sexual violence than did other "low-risk groups." In other words, the members of some fraternities and athletic teams are more likely to perpetrate sexual assault, while others are not.

Alcohol on Campus

Alcohol has been implicated in most sexual assault cases on campuses. According to the Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, in Rethinking Rites of Passage: Substance Abuse on America's Campuses (New York: Columbia University, 1994), 90% of all college rapes occur when either the victim or the rapist is under the influence of alcohol. Other studies estimate that one-third to three-quarters of all rapes and sexual assaults involve the use of alcohol by one or both parties.

Antonia Abbey et al. in "Alcohol and Dating Risk Factors for Sexual Assault among College Women" (Psychology of Women Quarterly, vol. 20, 1996), concluded that having one's sexual intentions misperceived was directly related to experiencing sexual assault. They argued that women tend to send misperceived messages when alcohol is consumed.

Other researchers also suggest that alcohol consumption increases the likelihood of sexual assault. In men, it appears to promote the expression of traditional gender beliefs about sexual behavior and creates expectancies associated with male sexuality and aggression, providing justification or a rationale for men to commit sexual assault. Furthermore, drinking increases the likelihood that men will misread women's friendly cues as signs of sexual interest. For women, alcohol consumption limits the ability to correct men's misunderstanding of cues. Drinking also decreases women's capacity to resist sexual assault and often prompts the victims to feel responsible for assaults.

In "Alcohol and Sexual Assault in a National Sample of College Women," Sarah E. Ullman, George Karabatsos, and Mary P. Koss polled a group of 3,187 college-age women about their own alcohol abuse, sexual victimization, sexual assault experience, and the social events surrounding their experience (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, vol. 14, June 1999). Of the 54.2% of women who had experienced some sexual victimization, over half (53.4%) reported that their assailants were using alcohol at the time of the incident, and 42% reported that they themselves were using alcohol. Over a third of the assaults (39.7%) occurred during dates with men that the women knew well or moderately well. Most assaults were committed without weapons, although 40% of the men used physical force. More than 90% of the victims said they attempted to resist the assault.

Ullman, Karabatsos, and Koss found that the victim's propensity to abuse alcohol and the use of alcohol prior to the assault by both victim and assailant were associated with more severe sexual victimization. The research revealed that a victim's use of alcohol before the assault did not predict more severe sexual victimization, as hypothesized; instead, researchers speculated that victim drinking may have been related to less offender aggression, because force was not needed to complete the rape of an intoxicated victim. Nor did alcohol's role in predicting the severity of sexual victimization vary in relationship to how well the victim knew the offender or whether a social situation was the setting for the assault. Ullman, Karabatsos, and Koss concluded that assaults in unplanned social situations were opportunistic in nature, and therefore were not affected by offender drinking.

Overall, the study findings indicated that alcohol use by victims and offenders before an assault plays direct and indirect roles in the severity of assaults, but generally the woman's drinking behavior contributes less strongly to the outcome of the attack.

Rohypnol—The "Date Rape Pill"

While alcohol abuse remains a significant problem on college campuses, other drugs, such as Rohypnol, have made resistance to attacks practically impossible. A hypnotic sedative ten times more powerful than Valium, Rohypnol (known as "Roofies," "Roches," and "Ropies") has been used to obtain nonconsensual sex from many women. Mixed in a drink, it causes memory impairment, confusion, and drowsiness. A woman may be completely unaware of a sexual assault until she wakes up the next morning. The only way to determine if a victim has been given Rohypnol is to test for the drug within two or three days of the rape, and few hospital emergency departments routinely screen for this drug. Health educators, high school guidance counselors, resident advisors at colleges, and scores of newspaper and magazine articles advise women not to accept drinks at parties or to leave drinks sitting unattended.

Although Rohypnol is legally prescribed outside of the United States for short-term treatment of severe sleep disorders, it is neither manufactured nor approved for sale in the U.S. The importation of the drug was banned in March 1996, and the U.S. Customs Service began to seize quantities of Rohypnol at U.S. borders. In response to reported abuse, the manufacturers reformulated the drug as green tablets that can be detected in clear liquids and are visible in the bottom of a cup.

In October 1996 President Bill Clinton signed a bill amending the Controlled Substances Act to increase penalties for using drugs to disarm potential victims of violent crime. Anyone convicted of slipping a controlled substance, including Rohypnol, to an individual with intent to commit a violent act, such as rape, faces a prison term of up to twenty years and a fine as high as two million dollars. The law also increased penalties for manufacturing, distributing, or possessing Rohypnol with the intent to distribute it.

Two other drugs are also used as date rape pills. Gamma hydroxybutyric acid (GHB, also known as "Liquid Ecstasy") enhances the effects of alcohol, which reduces the drinker's inhibitions. It also causes a form of amnesia. Ketamine hydrochloride (also known as "Special K") is an animal tranquilizer used to impair a person's natural resistance impulses. During 2002, anecdotal reports about another dangerous drug surfaced—a combination of methylenedioxymethamphetamine (known as "Ecstasy," "MDMA," or "crystal methamphetamine") and Viagra (a prescription drug used to treat erectile dysfunction)—dubbed "Sextasy." According to media reports, the drugs are taken together by male teens because Viagra offsets impotence, a potential side effect of methamphetamine use. Public health officials are alarmed by this "off-label" use of Viagra and fear that it may contribute to increased rates of sexually transmitted diseases and sexual assault.

The Political Conflict: "One in Four"

The frequency of date rape has become a highly controversial subject. The most widely publicized rate of date rape, and the source of this dispute, was that "one in four" women are victims. This number originated in a study by Mary Koss, C. Gedycz, and N. Wisniewski. In "The Scope of Rape: Incidence and Prevalence of Sexual Aggression and Victimization in a National Sample of Higher Education Students" (Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, vol. 55, 1987), Koss, Gedycz, and Wisniewski interviewed more than three thousand women nationwide about sexual violations. Among the ten questions asked by the researchers were: "Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs? Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man threatened or used some degree of physical force to make you? Have you had sexual acts (anal or oral intercourse or penetration by objects other than the penis) when you didn't want to because a man threatened or used some degree of physical force to make you?"

Based on the interviews, Koss, Gedycz, and Wisniewski determined that 15.4% of the women had been raped and 12.1% had been victims of attempted rape, making the total number of women who were victims of rape or attempted rape 27.5%. The women, however, saw things differently. Only 27% of the 15.4% Koss et al. had labeled as "raped" agreed with that classification. Of the remainder, 49% said it was "miscommunication," 14% said it was a crime but not rape, and 11% said they didn't feel victimized. Furthermore, Koss, Gedycz, and Wisniewski found that 42% of the women they had classified as rape victims had sex again with their attackers on at least one other occasion.

Critics of this study faulted Koss, Gedycz, and Wisniewski for counting among their rape victims women who had had intercourse as a result of alcohol or drugs. If a woman passed out and her partner had intercourse with her, she had been raped, since the act was committed without her consent. But not everyone agreed that she had been raped if she had too much to drink and engaged in sex because her judgment was impaired, regardless of whether or not she regretted her actions later.

Katie Roiphe, the author of The Morning after: Sex, Fear, and Feminism (Boston: Back Bay, 1994), observed in a 1993 interview that date rape has become a synonym for bad sex, sex that is pressured, sex while drunk, or next-day regrets. If all these situations were called rape, she concluded, then almost everybody has been "raped" at one time or another. The Roiphe interview was conducted by Judith Stone and published as "Sex, Rape and Second Thoughts" (Glamour, 91, October 1993).

If the women in Koss, Gedycz, and Wisniewski's study who did not identify themselves as raped while under the influence of drugs or alcohol were removed from the total, the rate of rape and attempted rape drops from one in four to one in twenty-two and one in thirty-three, respectively. Koss, Gedycz, and Wisniewski defended their inclusion of these women, citing the Ohio law that states, "No person shall engage in sexual conduct with another person… when… for the purpose of preventing resistance the offender substantially impairs the other person's judgment or control by administering any drug or intoxicant to the other person." But the researchers later conceded that the question was ambiguously worded, because they omitted the portion of the statute that refers to "the situation where a person plies his intended partner with drink or drugs in hopes that the lowered inhibition might lead to a liaison."

Despite the firestorm of criticism that followed the widespread dissemination of the rates cited in Koss, Gedycz, and Wisniewski's study, their research continues to be cited by credible providers of health and social policy data, including the Centers for Disease Control in the Dating Violence Fact Sheet and Dating Violence (Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2002).

RAPE AMONG LESBIANS AND GAY MEN

Lesbians and gay men have been victims of rape and sexual abuse at rates comparable to or higher than rates in the heterosexual community. In "Comparing Violence over the Lifespan in Samples of Same-Sex and Opposite Sex Cohabitants" (Violence and Victims, vol. 14, no. 4, 1999), researchers Patricia Tjaden, Nancy Thoennes, and Christine J. Allison found that cohabiting lesbians were nearly twice as likely as women living with male partners to have been forcibly raped as a minor (16.5% versus 8.7%) and nearly three times as likely to report being raped as an adult (25.3% versus 10.3%). The study also found that 15.4% of cohabiting gays were raped as minors, while 10.8% were raped as adults. The rate of rape for heterosexual men living with female partners was insignificant.

The researchers found that cohabiting gays usually had been raped by strangers and acquaintances, while cohabiting females usually had been raped by intimate partners. A vast majority of the rape victims, regardless of gender or sexual preference, were raped by men.

Gay and lesbian cohabitants were also significantly more likely to report being physically assaulted as a child by an adult caretaker. Among gays, 70.8% reported such violence, compared to 50.3% of heterosexual cohabitants. Among women, the figures were 59.5% and 37.5%, respectively. Gay and lesbian cohabitants also experienced higher levels of physical assault in adulthood.

The study also found that same-sex cohabiting partners reported significantly more intimate partner violence than did cohabiting heterosexuals. About 32% of gay respondents said they had been raped or physically assaulted by a spouse or cohabiting partner at some point in their lives, compared to just 7.7% of heterosexual men. Among lesbian cohabitants, 39.2% reported having been physically assaulted by a spouse or cohabiting partner, compared to 20.3% of women living with male partners. Tjaden, Thoennes, and Allison noted that lesbian cohabitants were also more than twice as likely to report having been victimized by male intimate partners than by female intimate partners, with 30.4% of the lesbian cohabitants raped or physically assaulted by male intimates. Only 11.4% of that group said they were raped or physically assaulted by female intimate partners. The same group reported less violence by their female partners than did heterosexual women living with males, leading the researchers to conclude that women are far more likely to be assaulted by male intimate partners than by female intimate partners.

SEXUAL HARASSMENT

Guys were encouraged to get as drunk as they could, and do whatever they could to the women. If they felt like grabbing a woman by the boob or the ass, that was okay. They would use their power and authority to make you think you didn't have a job if you didn't go along.

—A former pharmaceutical company sales representative

Sexual harassment is hardly a new phenomenon. In the early days of Hollywood, it was generally accepted that many actresses auditioned for roles on the "casting couch," finding their way into films by acquiescing to the sexual demands of directors. The businessman chasing his secretary around the desk has long been a common theme of cartoonists. Until the 1970s, remarks laced with sexual innuendo were still considered acceptable in the workplace. But as women became more prominent in the work force, behavior that had been condoned and even encouraged was redefined as sexual harassment.

Definitions

Sexual harassment is a form of sexual discrimination prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, sexual harassment is "unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct that enters into employment decisions and/or conduct that unreasonably interferes with an individual's work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment." Despite the legal definition, sexual harassment allegations remain difficult to prove and hard to refute.

There are two forms of harassment: quid pro quo, the Latin term meaning "this for that," and hostile-workenvironment harassment. Quid pro quo harassment occurs when an employee is pressured to choose between submitting to sexual advances or losing a job benefit, such as a promotion, raise, or the job itself. Hostile-work-environment harassment is unwelcome conduct that is so severe that it creates an intimidating or offensive work environment. For example, an employee who tells sexually explicit jokes that offend coworkers could be accused of creating a hostile work environment.

In 1986 the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson established the legal standard of a hostile work environment. The case originated when Michelle Vinson sued her employer, claiming her supervisor had harassed her constantly and raped her. A lower court ruled against Vinson, but the Supreme Court reversed the decision, focusing on the hostile environment clause of the law, which, the court found, "affords employees the right to work in an environment free from discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult."

Cases

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is the federal agency responsible for investigating and resolving charges of sexual harassment. The commission received 6,127 sexual harassment cases in 1990. By 1997 that number reached its highest level, 15,889. The number dropped slightly over the subsequent four years, but had increased again to 15,792 in 2002. While the number of cases has remained about the same, the amount of money awarded to sexual harassment victims has grown steadily, from a total of $7.1 million in awards in 1990 to $50.3 million in 2002. Changes in the Civil Rights Act of 1991 gave people suing for sexual harassment the right to jury trials and permission to sue for compensatory and punitive damages, opening the door for larger monetary awards. Some critics charge that the huge awards are excessive and disproportionate to the offenses.

When considering the merits of cases, courts apply a variety of tests to distinguish merely rude behavior from true instances of harassment. They ask whether a given gesture, comment, or action was unwelcome and of a sexual nature. If it meets these criteria, courts then examine the severity and prevalence of the behavior. Generally, the more extreme the behavior, the less frequently it needs to have occurred to be deemed sexual harassment.

Some experts predicted that sexual harassment would be eliminated, or at least sharply reduced, as women became more accepted in the workplace. Instead, 1998 saw four major sexual harassment cases in the U.S. Supreme Court, three of which were brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. These three cases clarified employer liability for sexual harassment in the workplace. The first involved Joseph Oncale, who was sexually assaulted by his coworkers and a supervisor on an oil rig off the coast of Louisiana. He filed a federal lawsuit alleging sexual harassment. Oncale lost to the lower court because he and his coworkers were male. But according to the unanimous ruling by the Supreme Court in Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, same-sex sexual harassment constitutes legal discrimination.

In Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, Beth Faragher, who was employed for five years as a lifeguard for Boca Raton, Florida, alleged she endured repeated incidences of touching, sexual gestures, and sexual comments from two male bosses. Because Faragher feared retaliation, she did not report the abuse until after leaving her job, when she filed a sexual harassment suit against the city. The city responded that because it was never made aware of the events, it had no liability for the alleged actions of the supervisors. Although the city had a sexual harassment policy, it had not distributed that policy to Faragher or her department. The Supreme Court made it clear that any large employer must establish, distribute, and enforce a sexual harassment policy.

In Burlington Industries v. Ellerth, the court considered the case of Kimberly Ellerth, who claimed she was subjected to constant sexual harassment by a manager. Burlington Industries argued that Ellerth was not financially burdened by the harassment and that as a result, Burlington was not liable. The Supreme Court held that an employer could be liable when a supervisor causes a hostile work environment, even when the employee suffers no tangible job consequences and the employer is unaware of the offensive conduct. The manager's numerous alleged threats were found to constitute severe or pervasive conduct.

In both the Faragher and Ellerth cases, the Supreme Court made it clear that a worker who is harassed has a duty to report it. Employers must have a sexual harassment policy that is compliant with the law, disseminate the policy so that all employees know about it and know how to use it, ensure that employees have effective avenues to file complaints, respond promptly and effectively to complaints, and enforce the policy with appropriate actions.

The fourth case, Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District, was brought under Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972. It concerned a school district's liability for a teacher's sexual involvement with a fourteen-year-old student. Alida Gebser, a student in the Lago Vista, Texas, school district, claimed her relationship with the teacher was consensual, but she also said she was afraid to tell anyone about it, fearing she would be barred from the advanced-level courses the teacher taught. The teacher pleaded guilty to charges of statutory rape, and Gebser filed a civil suit against the school district. The Supreme Court ruled that a school district could not be held liable because the student had not told a supervisor, stating that a student must prove a school district acted with "deliberate indifference" to a complaint.

Sexual Harassment in the Military

Sexual harassment in the military captured the public's attention in 1991 when eighty-three female officers claimed they were abused at a convention of naval and marine pilots, which created an uproar that became known as the Tailhook Scandal. Of about 140 charges leveled at officers as a result, not one case made it to trial. Less than half of the accused men "went to the mast," an internal disciplinary procedure that levied fines and career penalties.

In November 1996 four drill instructors and a captain at the U.S. Army's Aberdeen, Maryland, training center were charged with harassment and rape of female recruits. Within a month, more than fifty women had filed charges alleging sexual assault or rape. Sergeant Major Gene McKinney was tried on charges of coercing sexual favors from six women after they accused him of harassing or assaulting them. A month-long military trial resulted in McKinney's acquittal of all sex-related charges. He was, however, found guilty of a single count of obstructing justice and was subsequently demoted to master sergeant.

On July 7, 2000, the army inspector general confirmed charges of sexual harassment made by Lieutenant General Claudia Kennedy against Major General Larry Smith. Kennedy did not report the harassment until she learned Smith was to be selected to serve as deputy inspector general of the army, a position responsible for oversight of investigating instances of sexual harassment and directing programs to prevent and eliminate harassment. As a result of the substantiated charges, Smith did not assume the position of deputy inspector general and was issued an administrative memorandum of reprimand.

Military regulations forbid intimate relations between officers and enlisted personnel and between supervisors and their subordinates. The official army policy on sexual harassment calls for "zero tolerance" on the issue, and the edict is drilled into soldiers from their first day in the service. Nevertheless, violations continue throughout the armed services. Through the Department of Veterans Affairs, female veterans are counseled for sexual trauma. Caseloads are up sharply, from 2,090 in 1993 to more than ten thousand just nine years later. Marsha Tansey Four, Chair of the Advisory Committee on Women Veterans in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Veteran Affairs Committee on May 6, 2004 that a 2002 survey had found that 5% of female veterans and 1% of male veterans had experienced sexual trauma in the military.

The situation in the military is aggravated by the almost absolute power a superior has over a subordinate, especially in basic and advanced training units. From the moment recruits enter basic training, they learn that they must always obey their drill sergeants. With such absolute, unquestioned power, the drill sergeant can easily make a purposely difficult situation even worse.

Teri Spahr Nelson, a therapist and editor of For Love of Country: Confronting Rape and Sexual Harassment in the Military (Binghamton, NY: Haworth Maltreatment and Trauma Press, 2002), estimated that "two-thirds of female service members experience unwanted, uninvited sexual behavior in the military. The problems of sexual harassment and sexual assault in the U.S. military are epidemic." Nelson wrote that in one year alone, an estimated 9% of women in the Marines, 8% in the Army, 6% in the Navy, and 4% in the Air Force and Coast Guard have very likely been victims of rape or attempted rape.

ARASSMENT IN THE FEDERAL WORKPLACE

In the study Sexual Harassment in the Federal Workplace (Washington, DC: U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, 1995), the latest report on sexual harassment in the federal work force available, workers were polled about sexual harassment in 1980, 1987, and 1994. According to these polls, rates of sexual harassment remained fairly stable over the fourteen-year period. In 1987, 14% of men and 42% of women reported harassment, compared to 19% of men and 44% of women in 1994. These rates included behavior that ranged from pressure for dates to sexual jokes to rape.

In the 1980 survey, 91% of women and 84% of men thought it was harassment for a supervisor to pressure for sexual favors. By 1994 nearly all of the respondents thought pressure for sexual favors from a supervisor was harassment (99% of women and 97% of men). Some portion of the observed shift in thinking and apparent heightened awareness of these issues may be attributable to Anita Hill's 1991 appearance before the U.S. Senate during Clarence Thomas's Supreme Court confirmation hearing. Hill, who had worked as Thomas's assistant at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleged that Thomas had repeatedly pressured her for dates and made lurid remarks during her employment. An estimated thirty million households watched the three-day televised proceedings, which made sexual harassment one of the year's most hotly debated topics. In the year following that hearing, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recorded a 50% increase in sexual harassment complaints.

Different Perceptions

The Merit Systems Protection Board study revealed that men and women view sexual teasing, jokes, and remarks differently. In 1987 less than half the men, or 47%, thought this behavior was harassment when it was done by a coworker, compared with 64% of women. In 1994 these percentages rose to 64% for men and 77% for women. At least twice as many women as men reported experiencing sexual harassment throughout the period of the study.

This difference in perception is at the heart of a legal controversy about how to define sexual harassment. Normally, a court defines behavior as harassment if a "reasonable person" views the situation as harassment. Some advocates insist that harassment should be defined on a "reasonable woman" standard instead. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, in the 1991 case Ellison v. Brady, advocated a "reasonable woman" standard when it argued that words and actions men might consider mild harassment, women found threatening and perhaps a prelude to more serious sexual assault. The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington, D.C., disagreed, charging that this standard would have the effect of "gutting the concept of neutrality under the law."

Differences between male and female perceptions were underscored in the Merit Systems Protection Board study. Nearly twice as many men as women thought the issue of sexual harassment had been overemphasized.

Handling Harassment

The Merit Systems Protection Board study found that the most frequent response to sexual harassment was to ignore it—44% of harassment victims did just that. The reason for some of this inaction may be related to the perceived insignificance of the offense. For some, however, the harassing behavior was quite serious, and yet they did nothing. The next most common reaction to unwanted sexual attention was to ask or tell the perpetrator to stop. About one-third of harassment victims said this was the approach they used. Another 28% responded by avoiding the harasser.

The survey found that respondents felt that the most effective methods of dealing with harassment were to ask or tell the person to stop and to report the situation to a supervisor. The strategies that survey respondents considered most effective for preventing harassment largely relied on the adequacy of communication and the organization's ability to get the word out to employees at every level. Onequarter of harassment victims filed grievances or adverse action appeals, 30% filed discrimination complaints or suits, and 42% requested an investigation by the employing organization. Less than 15% of victims requested an investigation by an outside organization, and 17% took other actions. Although some victims took more than one action to report and seek recourse against those who harassed them, others chose to take no action at all. Half of the victims who chose not to take formal action said they did not consider the offense serious enough, 40% felt other actions resolved the situation, and 29% feared that taking formal action would worsen their work situations.

There are sharp penalties for violating federal agency sexual harassment policies. Employees risk suspension, demotion, and loss of their jobs. Victims opting to sue the federal government for on-the-job harassment may seek as much as $300,000 in compensation for the abuse.