Way Women Dress Is Responsible for Sexual Harassment

Sexual Harassment

Countless men are losing their jobs and families because of erroneous claims of sexual harassment. Nowadays, women press charges of sexual harassment in the workplace without taking responsibility for the way they act, speak, and dress. However, when deciding sexual harassment cases, judges and juries take into account the complainant's dress because it is a factor in determining guilt. Charging a man with sexual harassment because he made a pass at a woman in a tight blouse and a mini skirt is like convicting him for being alive. Heterosexual men are attracted to women and are generally expected to take the initiative in a new relationship. Women, on the other hand, do not act with honesty and integrity when they show up to work in skimpy outfits. Dressing provocatively sends a message about sexuality; women dress to express themselves. Women wear skimpy clothing mainly to attract attention, to gain approval based on their looks, and to garner affection from men. Women want to be found attractive, and yet when a man acknowledges her beauty, she will often retaliate with a lawsuit. The situation has become totally unfair. Women who dress provocatively pray on the weaknesses of the opposite sex and neglect the responsibility they have in sexual harassment cases. Either women should dress differently, or they should take come-ons with a grain of salt.

A place of employment is different from a nightspot or bar. When women go out at night to meet men, they expect to get "hit on." If men fail to notice their good looks, many women will feel insulted or rebuked, thus setting forth a deplorable double standard. At a place of employment, women should generally tone their manner of dress down if they expect to be treated with professional courtesy. The cause for many sexual harassment cases is not power struggle, but simply human nature. This is not to say that men do not abuse their positions of power when they perpetrate genuine sexual harassment. Before it was as acceptable for women to wear skimpy outfits as it is today, sexual harassment existed for different reasons. Now that styles and fashions include super low and tight jeans, women need to take responsibility for their dress codes. If a woman works in an environment that demands that she dress provocatively, then she should be doubly responsible. Instead of blaming the employer, she should find a new job.

Men who respond to women dressing provocatively are not all lecherous. Men are responding to their natural urges and desires. Often, men feel expected to come on to women for fear of seeming cold, aloof, unfriendly, or rude. Many women will refuse to talk to men unless the man flirts or shows interest in her. Thus, she will come to work dressed in skimpy clothes. However, once a coworker shows interest or complements her, he risks loosing his job. As a result, the workplace has become a tense social environment. In order to avoid the stigma of sexual harassment, many men act cold and aloof toward their female coworkers. This behavior has repercussions of its own.

Moreover, women deliberately induce sexual harassment by wearing provocative clothing. These women may already be in positions of power and use their sexuality to control and manipulate their male subordinates. This behavior is basically reverse harassment. Women are usually given more leeway than men in cases of sexual harassment because they are seen as victims. However, men are often victims of both "quid pro quo" and "hostile environment" types of sexual harassment. Quid pro quo sexual harassment occurs when a superior demands sexual favors in exchange for a promotion or if he or she threatens to fire an employee without the sexual favor. This obvious power struggle can work both ways; a woman who is in control of her sexuality might use her clothing to entrap a male colleague.

A hostile working environment is also a direct result of the way women dress. Marie S. Bowen cites a 1997 lawsuit in which a female worker complained about the hostile environment in her place of employment. The plaintiff claimed that the hostile work environment was caused by other females wearing outfits "as short as most person's underwear," and "extremely tight tops being worn by women with 'big chests,'" (Bowen). Therefore, the way women dress is directly responsible for the hostile work environment, which in turn gives rise to instances of sexual harassment.