By Kathryn Casteel and Andrea Jones-Rooy @FiveThirtyEight
近年 “sexual harassment” 、 “Inappropriate sexual behavior”、“sexual misconduct” 等定義模糊的詞被用來指稱幾乎任何讓一個人感覺到不適的行爲，造成一些雞毛蒜皮的小事被和其他嚴重的 (甚至是犯罪) 的行爲放在一起被人批判，對當事人似乎不太公平。 #MeToo 運動也因爲一些這類個案飽受批評， 這些個案讓人覺得現在只要是社交互動都有被指控爲性騷擾的可能性， 那是不是以後大家都不要理別人了？ 本文介紹了學者 Fitzgerald 所提出的語言系統， 希望藉由普及這套系統讓大衆對什麼是不合適的行爲能夠有更清楚的認知。
This inability to distinguish between different types of unwanted sexual behaviors has arguably had major consequences for a movement that is trying to shift these subtler behaviors from the realm of the historically overlooked to the currently unacceptable.
“People like to use ‘sexual misconduct’ as the basket in which they throw things that they don’t think are bad enough to call sexual harassment,” said Louise Fitzgerald, a professor emeritus of psychology and gender and women’s studies whose research interests include sexual violence.
Naomi Mezey, a professor at Georgetown University’s law school and co-director of the Georgetown Gender Justice Initiative… “Words like ‘sexual misconduct’ mean everything from rape to a bad date,” she said. “People fear that we’re making the most basic interactions illegal.”
Louise Fitzgerald 在 1980 年代末到 2000 年代初所開發的語言系統/框架：
- 16 種行爲，分爲三大類
- 性別敵意 (Gender hostility)，分爲兩小類
- Sexist hostility – 和性別有關
- Sexual hostility – 和性有關
- 不受歡迎的關注 (Unwanted sexual attention)
- 威逼利誘 (Sexual coercion) – 前幾類的行爲， 但伴隨著對職場相關個人利益的威脅或利誘。
- 性別敵意 (Gender hostility)，分爲兩小類
Today, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforces federal anti-discrimination laws in the workplace. Unlawful sexual harassment includes “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature” as well as “offensive remarks about a person’s sex,” according to the agency’s website. But there are limits: The agency also notes that the law doesn’t “prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious” and that harassment is only illegal when it is recurrent or severe.
法律詞彙 quid pro quo (來源):
The term quid pro quo is also used in the contexts of politics and Sexual Harassment. In politics quid quo pro can refer to the use of political office for personal benefit. For instance, an elected official might promise favorable governmental treatment to a person in exchange for something of value. This form of quid pro quo would be a violation of the law. On the federal level, the Hobbs Act (18 U.S.C.A. § 1951 ) makes it a felony for a public official to extort property under color of office. Trading campaign contributions for promises of official actions or inactions are also prohibited under the act.
In the area of sexual harassment, quid pro quo describes a form of sexual blackmail. Quid pro quo sexual harassment is the conditioning of employment benefits on an employee’s sub-mission to unwelcome sexual conduct. Title VII of the civil rights act (42 U.S.C.A. § 2000 (e)-2 ) provides a remedy for quid pro quo sexual harassment. Most courts follow the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s guidelines and hold that the necessary quid pro quo exists if submission to unwelcome sexual advances “is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual’s employment” or if submission to unwelcome sexual advances “is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual” (29 C.F.R. § 1604.11(a)(1)-(2) ).