To understand the frequencies and communicative motivations of men engaging in street harassment, men’s tolerance of sexual harassment, and the relationship between power and street harassment experiences for both men and women using the frameworks of dyadic power theory and feminist theories, we surveyed 348 undergraduate participants at a university in the Pacific United States. Results indicated that men who believe they have lower power than women were the most likely to report engaging in street harassment. Results also indicated a positive relationship between men’s reported tolerance for sexual harassment and men’s reports of engaging in street harassment.
BirdS. R. (1996). Welcome to the men’s club: Homosociality and the maintenance of hegemonic masculinity. Gender & Society, 10, 120–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124396010002002
2.
BloodR. O.WolfeD. M. (1960). Husbands and wives: The dynamics of married living. Free Press.
ChaudoirS. R.QuinnD. M. (2010). Bystander sexism in the intergroup context: The impact of cat-calls on women’s reactions towards men. Sex Roles, 62, 623–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9735-0
5.
CromwellR. E.OlsenD. H. (Eds.). (1975). Power in families. SAGE.
6.
CrowneD. P.MarloweD. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349–354. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047358
7.
DavisD. (1993). The harm that has no name: Street harassment, embodiment, and African American women. UCLA Women’s Law Journal, 4, 133–178.
8.
DelGrecoM.ChristensenJ. L. (2020). Effects of street harassment on anxiety, depression, and sleep quality of college women. Sex Roles, 82, 473–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01064-6
9.
di LeonardoM. (1981). Political economy of street harassment. AEGIS: Magazine on Ending Violence Against Women, 51–57.
10.
DuffyM.ThorsonE.VulteeF. (2015). All communication is persuasive: Exploding the myth of objectivity. In DuffyM.ThorsonE. (Eds.), Persuasion ethics today (pp. 28–42). Routledge.
11.
DunbarN. E. (2004). Theory in progress: Dyadic power theory: Constructing a communication based theory of relational power. Journal of Family Communication, 4, 235–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/15267431.2004.9670133
DunbarN. E.BippusA. M.YoungS. L. (2008). Interpersonal dominance in relational conflict: A view from dyadic power theory. Interpersona, 2, 1–33.
15.
DunbarN. E.BurgoonJ. K. (2005). Perceptions of power and interactional dominance in interpersonal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22, 207–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407505050944
16.
DunbarN. E.JohnsonA. J. (2015). A test of dyadic power theory: Control attempts recalled from interpersonal interactions with romantic partners, family members, and friends. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 4, 42–62. https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.4.1.03dun
FairchildK.RudmanL. A. (2008). Everyday stranger harassment and women’s objectification. Social Justice Research, 21, 338–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0073-0
FilebornB.Vera-GrayF. (2017). “I want to be able to walk the street without fear”: Transforming justice for street harassment. Feminist Legal Studies, 25, 203–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-017-9350-3
21.
FloodM. (2008). Men, sex, and homosociality: How bonds between men shape their sexual relations with women. Men and Masculinities, 10, 339–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X06287761
22.
FrenchJ. R. P.RavenB. (1959). The bases of social power. In ShafritzJ. M.OttS.JangY. S. (Eds.), Classics of organization theory (pp. 251–260). Cengage Learning.
23.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.
24.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sexism: Measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00104.x
25.
HechtM. A.LaFranceM. (1998). License or obligation to smile: The effect of power and sex on amount and type of smiling. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1332–1342.
HoustonB. (1988). What’s wrong with sexual harassment. Atlantis: Critical Studies in Gender, Culture & Social Justice, 13, 44–47.
29.
IliesR.HausermanN.SchwochauS.StibalJ. (2003). Reported incidence rates of work related sexual harassment in the United States: using meta-analysis to explain reported rate disparities. Personnel Psychology, 56(3), 607–631. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00752.x
KieslingS. F. (2005). Homosocial desire in men’s talk: Balancing and re-creating cultural discourses of masculinity. Language in Society, 34, 695–726. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404505050268
32.
LaniyaO. O. (2005). Street smut: Gender, media, and the legal power dynamics of street harassment, or hey sexy and other verbal ejaculations. Columbia Journal of Gender and Law, 14, 91–130.
33.
LordT. L. (2009). The relationship of gender-based public harassment to body image, self-esteem, and avoidance behavior [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
34.
MacmillanR.NierobiszA.WelshS. (2000). Experiencing the streets: Harassment and perceptions of safety among women. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 37, 306–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427800037003003
35.
MazerD. B.PercivalE. F. (1989). Ideology or experience? The relationships among perceptions, attitudes, and experiences of sexual harassment in university students. Sex Roles, 20, 135–147.
36.
McMasterL. E.ConnollyJ.PeplerD.CraigW. M. (2002). Peer to peer sexual harassment in early adolescence: A developmental perspective. Development and Psychopathology, 14, 91–105.
37.
OlsonD. H.RabunskyC. (1972). Validity of four measures of family power. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 34, 224–234. https://doi.org/10.2307/350790
PowellG. N. (1986). Effects of sex role identity and sex on definitions of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 14, 9–19.
40.
PrattoF.SidaniusJ.StallworthL. M.MalleB. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741
41.
PryorJ. B. (1987). Sexual harassment proclivities in men. Sex Roles, 17, 269–290.
PryorJ. B.WhalenN. J. (1997). A typology of sexual harassment: Characteristics of harassers and the social circumstances under which sexual harassment occurs. In O’DonohueW. (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 129–151). Allyn & Bacon.
44.
QuinnB. A. (2002). Sexual harassment and masculinity: The power and meaning of “girl watching.”Gender & Society, 16, 386–402.
45.
RollinsB. C.BahrS. J. (1976). A theory of power relationships in marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 619–627. https://doi.org/10.2307/350682
46.
RubinR. B.PerseE. M.BarbatoC. A. (1988). Conceptualization and measurement of interpersonal communication motives. Human Communication Research, 14, 602–628.
47.
RussellB. L.TriggK. Y. (2004). Tolerance of sexual harassment: An examination of gender differences, ambivalent sexism, social dominance, and gender roles. Sex Roles, 50, 565–573. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SERS.0000023075.32252.fd
48.
Safilios-RothschildC. (1970). The study of family power structure: A review 1960–1969. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 32, 539–552. https://doi.org/10.2307/350250
49.
SchultzV. (1998). Reconceptualizing sexual harassment. Yale Law Journal, 107, 1692–1805.
50.
ShotlandR. L.CraigJ. M. (1988). Can men and women differentiate between friendly and sexually interested behavior?Social Psychology Quarterly, 51(1), 66–73. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2786985
51.
StrahanR.GerbasiK. C. (1972). Short, homogeneous versions of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28, 191–193.
52.
SullivanH. B. (2011). “Hey lady, you’re hot!” Emotional and cognitive effects of gender-based street harassment on women [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
53.
SullivanH. B.LordT.McHughM. (2010). Creeps and Casanovas: Experiences, explanations and effects of street harassment. In PaludiM. A.DenmarkF. L. (Eds.), Victims of sexual assault and abuse: Resources and responses for individuals and families (pp. 237–258). Praeger.
SwimJ. K.HyersL. L. (1999). Excuse me—What did you just say?! Women’s public and private responses to sexist remarks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 68–88.
56.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In WorchelS.AustinW. G. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Nelson-Hall.
57.
ThompsonD. M. (1994). The woman in the street: Reclaiming the public space from sexual harassment. Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, 6, 313–348.
58.
TuerkheimerD. (1997). Street harassment as sexual subordination: The phenomenology of gender-specific harm. Wisconsin Women’s Law Journal, 12, 167–206.
59.
TurkJ. L.BellN. W. (1972). Measuring power in families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 34, 215–222. https://doi.org/10.2307/350789
60.
TurnerJ. C.HoggM. A.OakesP. J.ReicherS. D.WetherellM. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Basil Blackwell.
WesselmannE. D.KellyJ. R. (2010). Cat-calls and culpability: Investigating the frequency and functions of stranger harassment. Sex Roles, 63, 451–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9830-2
63.
WoodJ. T. (2014). Critical feminist theories. In BraithwaiteD. O.SchrodtP. (Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 203–216). SAGE.
