Engaging with calls from organization scholars, I analyze the communicative mechanisms through which individuals, rather than organizations, become the focus in discussions of violence. Reading a legal decision regarding rape at the University of Colorado, I argue that organizational conceptualizations of sexual violence are marginalized as (a) noncommunicative, container models of organization are prioritized and (b) violence is understood as an action rather than one element in a system of meaning. On the basis of this analysis, I offer a feminist rereading of the case that identifies the organization as a participant in sexual violence. To recognize not only individual, but also organizational sexual violence, I suggest that scholars problematize the racialized gendering of organization. Further, I show that a communicative approach that articulates complex relationships between meaning and action is central for highlighting the intersectionality of sexual violence and for unmooring sexually violent agency from individuated physicality.
AbbeyA. (2005). Lessons learned and unanswered questions about sexual assault perpetration. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20, 39-42. doi:10.1177/0886260504268117
2.
AckerJ. (2006). Inequality regimes: Gender, class, and race in organizations. Gender & Society, 20, 441-464. doi:10.1177/0891243206289499
3.
AshcraftK. L. (2005). Feminist organizational communication studies: Engaging gender in public and private. In MumbyD. K.MayS. K. (Eds.), Engaging organizational communication theory & research: Multiple perspectives (pp. 141-169). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4.
AshcraftK. L.AllenB. J. (2003). The racial foundation of organizational communication. Communication Theory, 13, 5-38. doi:10.1093/ct/13.1.5
5.
AshcraftK. L.KuhnT. R.CoorenF. (2009). Constitutional amendments: “Materializing” organizational communication. Academy of Management Annals, 3, 1-64. doi:10.1080/19416520903047186
6.
AshcraftK. L.MumbyD. K. (2004). Reworking gender: A feminist communicology of organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
BainesD. (2010). Gender mainstreaming in a development project: Intersectionality in a post-colonial un-doing?Gender, Work & Organization, 17, 119-149. doi:10.1111/j/1468-0432.2009.00454.x
8.
BerginJ.WestwoodR. I. (2003). The necessities of violence. Culture and Organization, 9, 211-223. doi:10.1080/1475955042000195454
BogradM. (2005). Strengthening domestic violence theories: Intersections of race, class, sexual orientation, and gender. In SokoloffN. J.PrattC. (Eds.), Domestic violence at the margins: Readings on race, class, gender, and culture (pp. 25-38). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
11.
BrahA.PhoenixA. (2004). Ain’t I a woman? Revisiting intersectionality. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 5, 75-86.
12.
BrakeD. L. (2007). Title IX as pragmatic feminism. Cleveland State Law Review, 55, 513-546.
13.
BrewisJ.LinsteadS. (2000). Sex, work, and sex work. New York, NY: Routledge.
14.
BrummansB. H. J. M. (2007). Death by document: Tracing the agency of a text. Qualitative Inquiry, 13, 711-727. doi:10.1177/1077800407301185
15.
BurmanM. (2010). The ability of criminal law to produce gender equality: Judicial discourses in the Swedish criminal legal system. Violence Against Women, 16, 173-188. doi:10.1177/1077801209355515
Carrillo RoweA. M. (2000). Locating feminism’s subject: The paradox of White femininity and the paradox to forge feminist alliances. Communication Theory, 10, 64-80. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2000.tb00179.x
18.
CatleyB.JonesC. (2002). Deciding on violence. Philosophy of Management, 2, 25-34. doi:10.5840/pom20022120
19.
ChamberlainL. J.CrowleyM.TopeD.HodsonR. (2008). Sexual harassment in organizational context. Work and Occupation, 35, 262-295. doi:10.1177/0730888408322008
20.
ClairR. P. (1993). The bureaucratization, commodification, and privatization of sexual harassment through institutional discourse. Management Communication Quarterly, 7, 123-157. doi:10.1177/0893318993007002001
21.
CollinsP. H. (2005). Black sexual politics: African Americans, gender, and the new racism. New York, NY: Routledge.
22.
ConnellR. W. (2002). On hegemonic masculinity and violence: Response to Jefferson and Hall. Theoretical Criminology, 6, 89-99. doi:10.1177/136248060200600104
CraigR. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9, 119-161. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00355.x
25.
CrenshawK. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241-1299. doi:10.2307/1229039
26.
CrossetT. W.BenedictJ. R.McDonaldM. A. (1995). Male student–athletes reported for sexual assault: A survey of campus police departments and judicial affairs offices. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 19, 126-140. doi:10.1177/019372395019002002
27.
CuklanzL. M. (1996). Rape on trial: How the mass media construct legal reform and social change. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
28.
DaviesC. (1996). The sociology of professions and the profession of gender. Sociology, 30, 661-678. doi:10.1177/0038038596030004003
29.
DillB. T.McLaughlinA. E.NievesA. D. (2007). Future directions of feminist research: Intersectionality. In Nagy Hesse-BiberS. (Ed.), Handbook of feminist research: Theory and practice (pp. 629-637). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30.
DoughertyD. S. (2009). Sexual harassment as destructive organizational process. In Lutgen-SandvikP.SypherB. D. (Eds.), Destructive organizational communication: Processes, consequences, and constructive ways of organizing (pp. 203-225). New York, NY: Routledge.
31.
DoughertyD. S.SmytheM. J. (2004). Sensemaking, organizational culture, and sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 32, 293-317. doi:10.1080/0090988042000275998
32.
EdwardsK. M.TurchikJ. A.DardisC. M.ReynoldsN.GidyczC. A. (2011). Rape myths: History, individual and institutional-level presence, and implications for change. Sex Roles, 65, 761-773. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-9943-2
33.
Enck-WaznerS. M. (2009). All’s fair in love and sport: Black masculinity and domestic violence in the news. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 6, 1-18. doi:10.1080/14791420802632087
34.
FisherB. S.CullenF. T.TurnerM. G. (2000). The sexual victimization of college women. United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf
35.
FlemingP. (2007). Sexuality, power and resistance in the workplace. Organization Studies, 28, 239-256. doi:10.1177/0170840606068307
36.
FloresL. (2006). Gender with/out borders: Discursive dynamics of gender, race, and culture. In DowB. J.WoodJ. T. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of gender and communication (pp. 379-396). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37.
ForbesD. A. (2009). Commodification and co-modification: Explicating Black female sexuality in organizations. Management Communication Quarterly, 22, 577-613. doi:10.1177/0893318908331322
38.
GageE. A. (2008). Gender attitudes and sexual behaviors: Comparing center and marginal athletes and nonathletes in a collegiate setting. Violence Against Women, 14, 1014-1032. doi:10.1177/1077801208321987
39.
GaveyN.SchmidtJ. (2011). “Trauma of rape” discourse: A double-edged template for everyday understandings of the impact of rape?Violence Against Women, 17, 433-456. doi:10.1177/1077801211404194
GoldenA. G.KirbyE. L.JorgensonJ. (2006). Work–life research from both sides now: An integrative perspective for organizational and family communication. Communication Yearbook, 30, 143-195. doi:10.1207/x15567419cy3001_4
42.
HarrisC. I. (1993). Whiteness as property. Harvard Law Review, 106, 1707-1791. doi:10.2307/1341787
43.
HartmanS. V. (1997). Scenes of subjection: Terror, slavery and self-making in nineteenth century America. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
44.
HasianM. (2004). Critical legal theorizing, rhetorical intersectionalities, and the multiple transgressions of the “tragic mullata,” Anastasie Desarzant. Women’s Studies in Communication, 27, 119-148. doi:10.1080/07491409.2004.10162470
45.
HearnJ.ParkinW. (2001). Gender, sexuality and violence in organizations: The unspoken forces of organization violations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46.
HengeholdL. (2000). Remapping the event: Institutional discourses and the trauma of rape. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 26, 189-214. doi:10.1086/495571
47.
HollandS. (2009). The enigmatic Lynndie England: Gendered explanations for the crisis at Abu Ghraib. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 6, 246-264. doi:10.1080/14791420903049744
48.
hooksb. (1994). Feminism inside: Toward a Black body politic. GoldenT. (Ed.), Black male representations of masculinity in contemporary American art (pp. 127-140). New York, NY: Whitney Museum of American Art.
49.
JasinskiJ. (2001). The status of theory and method in rhetorical criticism. Western Journal of Communication, 65, 249-270. doi:10.1080/10570310109374705
KitchS. (2009). The specter of sex: Gendered foundations of racial formation in the United States. Albany: State University of New York Press.
52.
LiefoogheA. P. D.Mackenzie DaveyK. (2001). Accounts of workplace bullying: The role of the organization. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10, 375-392. doi:10.1080/13594320143000762
53.
LindemannK. (2010). Masculinity, disability, and access-ability: Ethnography as alternative practice in the study of disabled sexualities. Southern Communication Journal, 75, 433-451. doi:10.1080/1041794x.2010.504454
54.
LinsteadS. (1997). Abjection and organization: Men, violence, and management. Human Relations, 50, 1115-1145. doi:10.1177/001872679705000904
55.
LisakD.MillerP. M. (2002). Repeat rape and multiple offending among undetected rapists. Violence and Victims, 17, 73-84. doi:10.1891/vivi.17.1.73.33638
56.
McCallL. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30, 1771-1800. doi:10.1086/426800
57.
McGeeM. C. (1990). Text, context, and the fragmentation of contemporary culture. Western Journal of Communication, 54, 274-289. doi:10.1080/10570319009374343
58.
McKayJ.RoweD.MillerT. (2001). Panic sports and the racialized male body. In MillerT. (Ed.), Sportsex (pp. 79-102). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
59.
McKerrowR. E. (1989). Critical rhetoric: Theory and praxis. Communication Monographs, 56, 91-111. doi:10.1080/03637758909390253
60.
MessnerM. A. (2002). Taking the field: Women, men, and sports. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
61.
MumbyD. K.StohlC. (1991). Power and discourse in organization studies: Absence and the dialectic of control. Discourse & Society, 2, 313-332. doi:10.1177/0957926591002003004
62.
NakayamaT. K.KrizekR. L. (1995). Whiteness: A strategic rhetoric. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 81, 291-309. doi:10.1080/00335639509384117
63.
Niemi-KiesiläinenJ.HonkatukiaP.RuuskanenM. (2007). Legal texts as discourses. In GunnarssonÅ.SvenssonE.DaviesM. (Eds.), Exploiting the limits of law: Swedish feminism and the challenge to pessimism (pp. 69-87). Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
64.
NkomoS. M. (1992). The emperor has no clothes: Rewriting “race in organizations.”Academy of Management Review, 17, 487-513. doi:10.5465/AMR.1992.4281987
65.
OnoK. A.SloopJ. M. (1992). Commitment to telos—A sustained critical rhetoric. Communication Monographs, 59, 48-60. doi:10.1080/03637759209376248
66.
PatemanC. (1989). Feminist critiques of the public/private dichotomy. In PatemanC. (Ed.), The disorder of women (pp. 118-140.). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
67.
PearsonK. (2007). The trouble with Aileen Wuornos, feminism’s “first serial killer.”Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 4, 256-275. doi:10.1080/14791420701472791
68.
PelzerP. (2003). The dinner party of silent gentlemen: The intrinsic violence of organisations. Culture and Organization, 9, 225-237. doi:10.1080/1475955042000195445
69.
PresserL. (2005). Negotiating power and narrative in research: Implications for feminist methodology. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30, 2067-2090. doi:10.1086/428424
70.
RichardsonB. K.TaylorJ. (2009). Sexual harassment at the intersection of race and gender: A theoretical model of the sexual harassment experiences of women of color. Western Journal of Communication, 73, 248-272. doi:10.1080/10570310903082065
71.
SalinD. (2003). Ways of explaining workplace bullying: A review of enabling, motivating, and precipitating structures and processes in the work environment. Human Relations, 56, 1213-1232. doi:10.1177/00187267035610003
72.
ScarduzioJ. A.Geist-MartinP. (2010). Accounting for victimization: Male professors’ ideological positioning in stories of sexual harassment. Management Communication Quarterly, 24, 419-445. doi:10.1177/0893318909358746
73.
SchneiderE. (1991). The violence of privacy. Connecticut Law Review, 23, 973-984.
74.
Simpson v. University of Colorado, 372 F. Supp. 2d 1229 (District Court, D. Colorado 2005).
75.
Simpson v. University of Colorado, 500 F. 3d 1170 (10th Cir. 2007).
76.
SmithA. (2005). Conquest: Sexual violence and American Indian genocide. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.
77.
TaylorB. C.CarloneD. (2001). Silicon communication: A reply and case study. Management Communication Quarterly, 15, 289-300. doi:10.1177/0893318901152008
78.
TaylorB. C.ConradC. (1992). Narratives of sexual harassment: Organizational dimensions. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 20, 401-418. doi:10.1080/00909889209365346
79.
TracyS. J.Lutgen-SandvikP.AlbertsJ. (2006). Nightmares, demons, and slaves: Exploring painful metaphors of workplace bullying. Management Communication Quarterly, 20, 148-185. doi:10.1177/0893318906291980
80.
WilliamsJ. (2000). Unbending gender: Why family and work conflict and what to do about it. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
81.
WilliamsP. J. (2009). Race and rights. In BackL.SolomonJ. (Eds.), Theories of race and racism: A reader (2nd ed., pp. 493-502). New York, NY: Routledge.
82.
ŽižekS. (2008). Violence: Six sideways reflections. New York, NY: Picador.
