透過您的圖書館登入
IP:44.223.94.103
  • 學位論文

性騷擾申訴者回應模式之經驗探究--以職場女性為例

The analysis of five complainers’ responses to the sexual harassment in the workplace

指導教授 : 王麗容

摘要


摘要 性騷擾是職場中很常見的性別問題!本研究是台灣第一個以性騷擾申訴者為研究對象並探討她們如何回應性騷擾的質性研究,採用女性主義的研究方法,並以充權觀點歸納影響她們回應性騷擾的因素,最終的目的是希望藉由她們的回應經驗,促使受害者更能積極回應性騷擾。 本研究一共訪問並分析了五位申訴者的回應經驗。這些案件均為男性主管對女部屬的性騷擾,包括交換型性騷擾一件和敵意環境型性騷擾四件。就評議程序來看,尚未評議者一件、申訴後即撤銷一件,另外,已評議成立者有三件。所有的案件中,只有一件進入司法程序,目前尚未結束訟爭。 從五位申訴者的回應經驗中發現,受害者的回應模式可分為兩大類,一為「內隱型」,二為「外顯型」。所謂「內隱型」的回應模式是指受害者對於性騷擾的回應偏向於處理自己的情緒,屬於不直接對抗騷擾者的回應模式,其中又可以分為「未察覺內隱型」及「察覺內隱型」兩種。所謂「外顯型」的回應模式是指受害者對於性騷擾的回應偏向於處理性騷擾事件本身,表現出來的回應方式就是採取行動直接或間接地對抗騷擾者,其中又可以分為「間接行動外顯型」及「直接行動外顯型」兩種。初步發現,她們採取的回應模式較偏向「內隱型」及「間接行動外顯型」。 本研究發現,影響申訴者回應性騷擾的因子有充權因子與去權因子,所謂充權因子是指促使受害者提出申訴或作出改變的因素,所謂去權因子是指促使受害者不願意提出申訴或消極回應的因素,這兩種因子各存在於社會文化/結構層次、組織層次及個人層次中。在社會文化/結構層次中,本研究發現二項充權因子及六項去權因子,前者包括「愈來愈多女性懂得捍衛自己權益」、「性騷擾業務承辦人員的支持」,後者包括「社會大眾仍有受害者迷思」、「社會大眾仍會責怪受害者」、「男性的平權意識有待加強」、「主管機關宣導不力、相關機關配合度低」、「敵意、無效率的外部申訴管道」及「政治力量介入性騷擾事件」;在組織層次中,並未發現充權因子,但有六項去權因子,分別是:「沒有性騷擾申訴管道、沒有防治政策、沒有教育訓練」、「女性員工的專業角色被壓抑」、「挾正式組織權力遂行性騷擾的主管」、「性騷擾盲的主管」、「職場有喝酒文化」、及「組織制度不健全」;在個人層次中,並未發現去權因子,但有三項充權因子,分別是:「受害者具有女性主義意識」、「受害者對性騷擾有正確認知」及「受害者的個人資源充足」。本研究認為,社會文化/結構及組織因素中的去權因子,是造成受害者採取「內隱型」及「間接行動外顯型」回應模式的主因。 本研究的建議為:一、政府應該:(一)建制雇用員工30人以下事業單位的性騷擾防治政策;(二)確保申訴管道的友善、中立與迅速;(三)辦理事業單位主管的教育訓練;(四)辦理性騷擾申訴案件承辦人員的教育訓練;(五)開發多元的宣傳管道;(六)加強性騷擾防治的社會資源網絡。二、事業單位應該:(一)公開揭示性騷擾防治政策;(二)避免過度、惡質的喝酒文化;(三)健全與妥善利用事業單位各項制度。三、職場女性應該;(一)閱讀與練習,提昇女性主義意識;(二)充實專業知能,提昇專業與競爭力;(三)懂得判斷、懂得諒解,建立自已的社會支持網絡;(四)少有輕浮及不當的言行舉止,避免被潛在的騷擾者找到機會;(五)往事已矣,別害怕離開工作環境。四、職場男性應該:(一)為職場性騷擾負起責任;(二)想要騷擾某人前,請先想一想。

關鍵字

性騷擾 職場 女性勞動 人權 充權 女權

並列摘要


Abstract Sexual harassment is a common gender problem in the workplace. This study targets on the sexual harassment complainers and tries to analyze how they deal with the problem. A qualitative research, this study adopts feminism and empowerment perspective to list the factors that affect their responses to sexual harassment. The purpose of this study is, by sharing these complainers’ experience, to urge every victim to deal with sexual harassment more courageously. This study interviews and examines five cases in which all the harassers are male superiors and all the victims are female subordinates. One of these five cases is quid pro quo sexual harassment, and the others are hostile environment sexual harassment. As far as the appraisal procedure is concerned, one case hasn’t been appraised yet, three have been appraised and there’s one in which the victim repealed the complaint after filing it. In addition, only one of these five cases is in the judicial proceedings right now. According to these five complainers’ experience, the victims’ responses can be classified into two categories: “internally focused” and “externally focused.” “Internally focused” means that victims tend to focus on their emotions when being harassed, not directly fighting back at the harassers. There are two types of internally focused victims: the one who is unaware of it (unconscious internally focused)and the one who is aware of it(conscious internally focused). “Externally focused” means that victims tend to focus on the problem itself when being harassed, directly or indirectly fighting back at the harassers. There are two types of externally focused victims: the one who directly fights back(directly externally focused) and the one who indirectly fights back(indirectly externally focused). In most cases, victims tend to be internally focused or indirectly externally focused. The study finds that empowerment and disempowerment factors are what affects a victim’s response to sexual harassment. An empowerment factor is the one that causes victims to file complaints or make changes; a disempowerment factor is the one that causes victims not to file complaints or respond passively. These two factors exist in Sociocultural/Structure-Level, Organization-Level and Individual-Level. In the Sociocultural/Structure-Level Explanations, there are two empowerment factors and six disempowerment ones. The empowerment factors are “more and more women know how to protect themselves from harassment,” and “agents in charge of sexual harassment complaints give support.” The disempowerment factors are as follows: “myths about victims still exist in Taiwan society,” “many people think victims are the one to blame,” “men’s gender consciousness needs to be promoted,” “Council of Labor Affairs hasn’t launched enough publicity campaigns and the related government organizations are reluctant to cooperate,” “the access to filing a complaint is not easy and hostile,” and “there may be some political intervention.” In the Organization-Level Explanations, there are six disempowerment factors but no empowerment ones. The six disempowerment factors are: “there is no access to filing a complaint, no policy to fight against sexual harassment, and no education or training,” “women’s professional profile is constrained”, “superiors or employers may use their power at work to harass their subordinates,” “superiors or employers are blind to sexual harassment,” “there is drinking culture in the workplace,” and “the organizational system is not effective.” In the Individual-Level Explanations, there are three empowerment factors but no disempowerment ones. The three empowerment factors are: “victims are in favor of feminism,” “victims know exactly what sexual harassment is like,” “victims have many resources.” In my view, it is the disempowerment factors in the Sociocultural/Structure-Level Explanations that cause victims to be “internally focused” or “indirectly externally focused” when responding to sexual harassment. The recommendations of this study are: First, the government should: (1) evolve a policy to prevent sexual harassment in a corporation with a workforce of below thirty, (2) make sure the access to filing a complaint is friendly, neutral and fast, (3) offer education and training to superiors or employers, (4) offer education and training to agents in charge of sexual harassment complaints, (5) launch various publicity campaigns, (6) strengthen the social support to the fight against sexual harassment. Second, the corporation should: (1) make public the policy fighting against sexual harassment, (2) avoid low-class drinking culture, (3) perfect and make use of every institution in the corporation. Third, career women should: (1) read and learn more, (2) improve their professional skills and be more competitive, (3) be well-connected and set up their own social network, (4) not have frivolous or improper behavior to avoid giving an opportunity to potential harassers, (5) let bygones be bygones and not be afraid of leaving the workplace. Fourth, men should: (1) take the responsibility for the sexual harassment in the workplace, (2) think about it before harassing others.

參考文獻


王麗容(2001)。大專院校性騷擾防治工作手冊(教育部委託辦理)。台北市:台灣大學社會工作學系暨研究所。
盧映潔(2004)。德國工作場所性騷擾法制簡介。中正法學集刊,14,349-394。
余貞誼(2005)。質性研究如何進行深度訪談與建立互信關係,婦研縱橫,76,31-47。
高鳳仙(2001)。性騷擾之法律概念探究。法令月刊,52(4),24-44。
羅燦煐(2002)。他的性騷擾?她的性騷擾?:性騷擾的性別化建構,台灣社會研究季刊,46,193-249。

被引用紀錄


曾迺婷(2017)。從性騷擾防治法(再)申訴過程探討防治網絡協同合作圖像〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342%2fNTU201700147
招承維(2009)。大學生網路性騷擾知覺、經驗與回應方式 ─以國立臺灣師範大學為例〔碩士論文,國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0021-1610201315160093
賴育貞(2016)。女性軍職人員遭遇性騷擾之經驗〔碩士論文,國立中正大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0033-2110201614044159

延伸閱讀