Mainstream Neglect of Sexual Harassment as a Social Problem

Dados Bibliográficos

ID3012133
AutoresAysan Sev''Er, Aysan Sev’er (autor correspondente), Aysan Sev'Er
Ano1996
Volume21
Fascículo2
Páginas185
Data de publicação1996-01-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoThe Canadian Journal of Sociology (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0318-6431 • E-ISSN: 1710-1123
EditoraJSTOR (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.2307/3341976
OpenAlexW308253799
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas5
Referências citadas24

Coverage of sexual harassment was analyzed through articles published in twenty journals between 1986 and 1994. analysis covered 914 issues and over 4,500 articles from Canada and the US. Results showed a clear neglect of the topic in the mainstream, while sexual harassment articles appeared almost exclusively in gender-based journals. Androcentric biases and traditional fears about claims-making activities are offered as reasons for this neglect. Some authors of published articles recalled gatekeeping by the reviewers/editors of the mainstream journals. Others admitted to avoiding the mainstream themselves. dangers involved in covering sexual harassment solely through gender-based journals are highlighted. Resume. Les reportages sur le harassement sexuel ont ete analyses dans les articles publies dans vingt revues entre 1986 et 1994. L'analyse porte sur 914 numeros de revue et plus de 4500 articles publies au Canada et aux Etats-Unis. Les resultats montrent une negligence evidente de ce sujet dans les publications d'interet general, mais la question du harassement sexuel est debattue presqu'exclusivement dans les revues feministes. On suggere ici que la raison de cette negligence se trouve dans les partis-pris androcentriques et la peur traditionelle pour les sujets contentieux. Certains auteurs d'articles publies mentionnent le role de triage exerce par les critiques et les editeurs des revues d'interet general. D'autres reconnaissent avoir evite eux-memes ce genre de publications. Finalement on met en evidence le danger de la negligence et le probleme de limiter les articles sur le harassement sexuelaux publications feministes. Introduction This paper explores the response of mainstream social sciences to sexual harassment as a social problem. First, social problematization and the role of gender in this process are discussed. Then, the sexual harassment literature is reviewed. Third, discrepancies between mainstream versus gender-based coverage of this problem is compared and reasons and implications are explored. Although there are variations, early definitions of social problems entail 1. objective situations of social disorganization, 2. social values of a sizable population endangered by this disorganization, and 3. recognition of the need for social action (Laskin, 1964; Freeman and Jones, 1973). Social problems hinder personal goals and frustrate people in their prevailing relations (Raab and Selznick, 1959; Merton and Nisbet, 1961). above criteria explicitly assume the factual nature of social problems. Implicitly, it is expected that such problems will summon social scientific attention. In Laskin's (1964: 9) words, The problem could not be too severe if not much is written on it; it is likely to be severe if a great deal is written on it. Other views on social problems emphasize the social construction aspect that earlier definitions had missed (Spector and Kitsuse, 1977). Constructionism underscores the socially fabricated nature of social reality as opposed to assessment of facts devoid of their social meanings. More recent approaches to social problems also take into account the power of some groups in the claims-making activities. Even the so called neutrality of academics as observers within the claims-making process is questioned (Gordon, 1993; Holstein and Miller, 1993; Smith, 1990). The days when we could naively assume that knowledge and truth presented themselves in unadulterated form to scholars who simply and neutrally recorded the phenomena around them are long since past (Spender, 1981: 193). Gillespie and Leffler (1987: 491) poignantly show the road blocks set against social problem claimants when they receive more critical scrutiny than those in favour of the [status quo]. Using sexual harassment as a case in point, the authors demonstrate how methodology (generalizability, operational definitions, etc.) can be used as an intellectual weapon to scrutinize and even alter the nature of the problem, which eventually gets reflected in the literature (Gillespie and Leffler, 1987: 498)

Criminology · Harassment · Mainstream · Neglect · Political science · Sexual violence · Social issues · Sociology · Feminism, Gender, and Sexuality Studies · Intimate Partner and Family Violence · Law · Psychology · Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies · Social Psychology