Hoffmann Elizabeth A
Purdue University, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Law & Society Program, Stone Hall, 700 West State Street, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA.
Law Hum Behav. 2004 Feb;28(1):29-45. doi: 10.1023/b:lahu.0000015002.56564.8e.
If male workers categorize different groups of women coworkers and, subsequently, treat them differently, the experiences of women from one of these groups would not be indicative of the experiences of women from another group. When this different treatment involves hostile environment sexual harassment of one group, but not the other, then the law must recognize the possibility of "selective sexual harassment." Without this understanding of the nuances of the workplace dynamics, a court could mistake the women of the unharassed group as representing "reasonable women" and the women of the harassed group as simply oversensitive. This paper draws on empirical data to demonstrate such a situation and advocates for a version of the "reasonable victim" standard to facilitate a closer analysis of hostile environment sexual harassment suits.
如果男性员工将女性同事划分成不同群体，继而区别对待她们，那么其中一个群体中女性的经历就不能代表另一个群体中女性的经历。当这种区别对待涉及对其中一个群体的敌意环境性骚扰，而不涉及另一个群体时，那么法律就必须承认“选择性性骚扰”的可能性。如果不理解职场动态的细微差别，法院可能会将未受骚扰群体中的女性视为“理性女性”的代表，而将受骚扰群体中的女性仅仅视为过于敏感。本文利用实证数据来证明这种情况，并倡导采用一种“合理受害者”标准，以便更深入地分析敌意环境性骚扰诉讼。
