1 Although sexual harassment (henceforth, SH) was not defined as a social problem before the 1970s, since then

it is widely recognized as a pervasive social problem, affecting substantial numbers of women (some even suggest as many as half of them!) in a range of settings, including: workplaces, academic frames, schools of all levels, and many kinds of social gatherings (e.g., Antecol & Cobb-Clark, 2004; Barak, 2005; Gruber, 1992; Marshall, 2005). Thus, research on SH is relatively recent, with most studies taking place only in the past two or three decades (Fitzgerald, Gelfand & Drasgow, 1995; Rimalt, 2005; Romito et al, 2004; Thomas, 2004). Paradoxically, despite its high formal seriousness, the typical social reaction toward the harassers, responsible for this phenomenon, in most national contexts is often permissive (e.g., Ashbaugh & Cornell, 2008; Fasting et al, 2004; Herzog, 2007; Marshall, 2005; Romito et al, 2004). This study is an investigation of this contradiction, suggesting an attitudinal explanation for this: despite the high formal seriousness of some expressions of SH in most formal criminal statutes, its different manifestations may not be perceived by the public as very serious this situation would support the tenets of the conflict model of the criminal law, detailed later. Hence, the goal of this study was to assess the perceptions of the public in this particular case Israelis concerning the seriousness of a range of SH behaviors.

Sexual harassment: its definition

Though SH is common today, and in spite of its pervasiveness and the growing research on it, the literature on SH does not still provide us without a generally shared and accepted social definition of it, which includes all of the behaviors that may constitute SH, from sexual coercion to sexist jokes (e.g., Antecol & Cobb-Clark, 2004; Gruber, 1992; Sbraga & O'Donohue, 2000). Generally speaking, most (both

2 American and European) scholarly definitions of SH tend to specify: verbal, nonverbal, and/or physical conducts, contacts, gestures, or advances that: (1) are unwelcome, unwanted, or unsolicited by the victim, (2) include comments or requests for favors of a sexual nature, (3) tend to occur in the context of a relationship of unequal power (e.g., teacher/student, boss/employee), (4) are deliberate or repeated, (5) tend to include: sexual extortion, indecent acts, suggestions owing sexual character, references focused on the sexuality of the victim, and degrading reference toward a person with regard to his/her gender or sexual orientation, and (6) tend to violate the dignity of a person, creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating and/or offensive environment (see Kisa et al, 2002; Romito et al, 2004; Samuels, 2004; Sbraga & O'Donohue, 2000). MacKinnon (1979) posits that SH occurs within the social context of different status and positions of men and women in society in general, and in particular in workplace. Accordingly, although SH potentially relates to any human being both men and women -, it is well established that men are the primary initiators of SH, and women experience more often more severe, physically intrusive, and intimidating forms of SH, than do men, both in the workplace and on other contexts (e.g., Antecol & CobbClark, 2004; Ashbaugh & Cornell, 2008; Rimalt, 2005). SH is particularly troubling due to the negative consequences it has for (female) workers, including increased job turnover, higher absenteeism, reduced job satisfaction, lower productivity, and adverse health outcomes (e.g., Romito et al, 2004; Terrance et al, 2004).1 Thus, and especially due to the efforts of feminist workers and scholars, SH is seen nowadays, at least formally, as a serious problem, and there is a growing body of literature on it, as well as widespread media coverage of SH cases (e.g., Samuels, 2004).

3 While there is considerable debate about what behaviors do constitute SH (see for example, Sbraga & O'Donohue, 2000), this chapter draws on the work of Fitzgerald and her associates (1997: 20), who defined it as: "unwanted sex-related behavior at work, that is appraised by the recipient as offensive, exceeding her resources, or threatening her well-being." According to this definition, these scholars developed a specific questionnaire the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ), a self-report inventory - to distinguish between several forms of SH. Based on their findings, in one of the few typologies of SH that can be found in the literature (see also Gruber, 1992; Till, 1980; U.S. Merit System Protection Board, 1987; Welsh et al, 2002), they identified three major dimensions or categories of potentially harassing behaviors from the more to the less serious forms, in their opinion -, that may describe the whole domain of SH (Fitzgerald et al, 1997; see also Gruber, 2002; Kalof et al, 2001; Kisa et al, 2002; Sbraga & O'Donohue, 2000). These three dimensions, achieved by factor analyses of their data and which were found to be distinctive from one another, reliable, and validly measurable in terms of perceptions and ratings of actual behavior (see Fitzgerald et al, 1995), are detailed in the following and are arranged in decreasing order of severity.

Fitzgerald and her associates' typology

The first - more serious - category of SH acts may be defined as sexual coercion, and tends to include (legally quid pro quo) physical coercion, imposition, assault, and sex crimes (Fitzgerald et al, 1995; 1997). This category of SH usually refers to a situation in which a female worker is demanded to supply sexual benefits to an employer, or even to another worker superior to her, as a condition for both the continuation of her work in this work frame, or the receipt of any material benefit,

4 such as promotion, a higher salary, and others (e.g., MacKinnon, 1979; Samuels, 2004; Welsh et al, 2002). Although this is considered the most severe, and accordingly also the least frequently reported, type of SH (e.g., Gruber et al, 1996),2 previous research examining SH actions lodged in both US (and also in French) courts has demonstrated that complaints involving these forms of SH increase the odds of a case being settled favorably for the complainant (see Saguy, 2003). The second relatively less serious - category in this typology is usually defined as unwanted sexual attention, and includes unwanted verbal and nonverbal requests, visual displays, or personal discussion, characterized by: unobtrusive, yet sexualized behavior or attention, such as ogling, stalking, leering or eyeing up a person's body; inappropriate, suggestive, and offensive gendered sexual advances; remarks or comments concerning one's body, appearance, dress, private life, sexual orientation, etc.; offensive flirtations, seductive behavior, and persistent pressure to date someone despite that person's refusals; unwanted letters and gifts; display of sexually suggestive pin-ups or calendars; pressure and demands for sexual favors in the return for promises of help to better a person's career; repeated suggestions for social activity outside of the work setting; suggestive remarks; patronizing behavior; and/or sexual innuendo (e.g, Fitzgerald et al, 1995; 1997; see also Marshall, 2005; Osman, 2004; Terrance et al, 2004; Welsh et al, 2002). Note that unlike the first category of sexual coercion that tends to occur once, behaviors in this second group frequently occur continuously, over a period of time. And third, the last less serious but apparently most widespread category of SH, commonly referred to as hostile environment or gender harassment (see DeSouza & Solberg, 2004), includes gender-related, crude or offensive behavior, such as leering derogatory, crudely sexual or seductive remarks, sexist jokes, suggestive stories,

5 comments about appearance, dress or body, staring, use of sexist teaching material, posting pornographic pictures in public, telling chauvinistic jokes, and/or sexual based actions or comments, mainly based on sexual stereotypes, that demean an individual on the basis of gender (Fitzgerald et al, 1995; 1997; see also Kalof et al, 2001).3

The present chapter

Empirical research (e.g., Fitzgerald et al, 1995; 1997; Kalof et al, 2001; Kisa et al, 2002; Sbraga & O'Donohue, 2000) has found these three aforementioned types of SH behaviors to be distinctive from one another, to be reliably and validly measurable in terms of perceptions and ratings of actual behaviors, and to correlate with various relevant personal, situational, and social factors. Note however that though research indicates high levels of agreement regarding the SH nature of the aforementioned first more serious category of harassing behaviors, disagreements, for example from the perspective of victim outcomes, as to the SH nature of less severe behaviors (included mainly in the third aforementioned category), are common. Accordingly, and based on this typology, the purpose of the present research was to assess public perceptions of the seriousness of different forms of SH, and to compare them, both to the aforementioned typology, and to other criminal offenses. In this regard, the assessment of public perceptions of SH is seen as crucially important. Differences of definition have direct implications for, among others, people's situation in the workplace, people's general conceptions of correct and incorrect sexual behavior, social research, and, of course, legislation and legal decisions in court (see Landau, 2003). As noted, systematic research in the field of SH is relatively recent. In the US, the first-large scale studies date from the beginning of the 1980s, in Europe from the mid-

6 1980s (e.g., Romito et al, 2004; Sigal et al, 2005), and the same in Asia (e.g., Tang et al, 1996). With the exception of few studies (see Sigal et al, 2005; Stockdale et al, 2002), however, the literature contains almost no evidence specifically relating to public perceptions of the seriousness of several SH acts. Moreover, due to its essence, most of the studies dealing with SH tend to depend on quasi-experimental and correlational research designs (Sbraga & O'Donohue, 2000). Thus this research may be referred as filling a gap in the SH literature. Although since 1970s public awareness of SH as an important social issue has grown, little is known, however, empirically, about the degree of seriousness preferences to which individuals consider different forms of SH, and accordingly it is not clear yet whether the public shares the belief expressed in formal criminal statutes that the various manifestations of SH should be considered criminal offenses at all, and if so, whether they are more, equally, or less serious than other unlawful acts. A more complete understanding of SH would be achieved, however, by examining the essential role played by public attitudes in the widespread politically and legally social response to this offense.4 This issue constitutes the main focus of the present study: for the first time to assess public perceptions of the seriousness of various forms of SH cases, and to compare them to the perceived seriousness of other typical offenses. In this way, the present study attempted to examine empirically whether the formal recognition of various forms of SH as serious criminal offenses in criminal codes reflects general views of the public at large, or on the contrary particular views of certain groups in it, such as feminists. In other words, this study may be perceived as attempting to analyze whether the inclusion of these offenses in criminal law corresponds to the criteria applied by the public in assessing the seriousness of various SH cases.

7 In this regard, this study may be seen as referring to the appropriateness of the consensus vs. conflict models of the criminal law. Briefly, it may be said that in opposition to the more politically oriented conflict model, the consensus model of the criminal law assumes that there exists a universal, wide social agreement on norms and views among the various social groups that constitute the public. Generally, this model maintains that modern societies are unified, coherent entities, with a common moral denominator. As a result, on a criminological level, this model postulates a close match between the attitudes of various social groups toward the definition of certain behaviors as criminal acts, their relative seriousness, and the expression of these agreements in the law (e.g., Rossi & Berk, 1997; Thomas et al, 1976; Warr et al, 1982). Unlike it, the conflict model predicts wide disagreement among diverse social groups on these dimensions, while the law tends to reflect only the particular attitudes of dominant socio-economic groups in society, with the purpose of securing and advancing their position (e.g., Chambliss & Seidman, 1971; Quinney, 1975).5 In the context of this consensus-conflict controversy I attempted (1) to ascertain whether Western and particularly Israeli - criminal law, by considering various forms of SH serious offenses, reflects general or particular views in this regard, and (2) in the latter case, to identify the social group(s) within the public whose severe views toward SH tend to be reflected in the law. To this end, and in the framework of seriousness studies, respondents from a large national (Israeli) sample were asked to evaluate subjectively the seriousness of (and to suggest the most appropriate penal measure for; henceforth for convenience, punishment), a collection of hypothetical, multidimensional, concrete scenarios, entailing both various forms of SH, and other (non-SH) many types of criminal offenses for control purposes.6 Operationally, the research goal was to assess whether

8 significant differences in the seriousness scores assigned to the scenarios would be found between the various forms of SH, and also between them and non-SH cases. Thus, and based on the former assumptions, the first hypothesis of the study was that: H1: Unlike the case for other typical violent criminal offenses typically committed by men against women (such as homicide, rape, and interpersonal violence), which will be perceived by most respondents as relatively serious, they will tend to perceive the SH scenarios again, men against women - as significantly less serious. In addition, research conducted in universities and worplace settings indicate, on the one hand, high levels of agreement regarding the sexually harassing nature of more serious, intrusive forms of behavior, in which physical coercion or assaults are involved, and on the other, wider disagreements as to the seriousness of less severe behaviors, such as sexist remarks, jokes, and seductive behavior (see Terrance et al, 2004; Thomas, 2004). Accordingly it was hypothesized that: H2: When we focus only on the ranking of SH situations, respondents will tend to perceive the various forms of SH, on the seriousness ranking, similarly to the aforementioned classification of Fitzgerald and her associates (1997). Third, it was also assumed that when the scenarios would reflect male-againstfemale violent situations, including SH, these perceptions would be affected especially by respondents gender, for the obvious reason that SH is more prevalent against women that it is against men (e.g., Kalof et al, 2001; Stockdale et al, 2002; Terrance et al, 2004). In the particular case of SH, several studies have found that compared to men, female respondents tended: to be less tolerant of SH, to report SH more often, to see a broader spectrum of behaviors as SH, and to perceive them as more severe, upsetting, inappropriate, bothersome, and threatening (e.g., Antecol & Cobb-Clark, 2004; DeSouza & Solberg, 2004; Goldberg & Zhang, 2004; Osman,

9 2004; Sigal et al, 2005; Terrance et al, 2004). Moreover, women assigned significantly more severe penalties to the accused harasser than men did (DeSouza et al, 2004; Sigal et al, 2005). Note that although gender differences appear to narrow when sexual behaviors are toward the highest ends of the SH continuum, perceptions of ambiguous behaviors continue to show gender differences (Russell & Trigg, 2004). These gender effects have been found to be consistent across cultures (Sigal et al, 2005), although the proportion of both men and women who would view unwanted sexual behavior to be SH increased dramatically over time (Antecol & Cobb-Clark, 2004). Thus the third hypothesis of this study was formulated as follows: H3: Respondents perceptions of SH scenarios would be affected significantly by the respondents' gender: unlike male respondents, female respondents would be significantly more likely to provide SH scenarios with higher seriousness scores.

Research implications
The present study has various implications, both theoretical and practical. On the theoretical level, the wide literatures on crime seriousness, general violence against women, and particularly on SH cases, contain no (or few) evidence on public perceptions of various forms of SH, and especially when compared to other varied criminal offenses. Thus, as said, the present study may be perceived as filling a gap in this literature in various theoretical issues. Moreover, this study adds to the understanding of the applicability of consensus-conflict tenets concerning the source of the criminal law. On the practical or policy level, it has often been argued that it is crucial for the law and the judicial system to enjoy the respect of the public. Indeed, popular support has been perceived as a central component of the concepts of legitimacy and legality, the implication being that official policy and law should

10 mirror peoples attitudes and conform to their sense of justice (e.g., Finkel, 1995). As a result, one implication of discrepancies between public attitudes and the position of the law is that it may adversely affect public trust and confidence in the law and the legal system, which, in turn, may undermine public willingness to comply with the former and to rely on the latter (Roberts, 1992).7

Research's location
Israel, the location of the present survey, is perceived as well suited for the analysis of seriousness perceptions toward SH and other criminal offenses, for various reasons: (1) Since research on SH is relatively new, most of the few studies on it have been carried out in the United States, Britain and Canada (see Timmerman & Bajema, 1999). Thus to date very few studies have been conducted in other countries (as an exception see Sigal et al, 2005), and specifically in Israel (as an exception, see Zeira et al, 2002). (2) The findings of the few crime seriousness studies conducted in Israel (e.g., Herzog, 2003; 2007), and the formal reference of the recently established Israeli criminal law to SH (in 1998), are very similar to those found in the literature (see Rimalt, 2005); hence the suitability of Israel as a research location for the analysis of seriousness perceptions of SH events. (3) In the context of empirical research, support has also been found in Israel for both the low seriousness perceptions of SH (Herzog, 2007), and of some violent acts typically committed against women among some groups of patriarchal respondents for example, Arabs and religious (e.g., Herzog, 2003). (4) Although SH has only recently begun to be discussed as a major public issue in Israel, and there are almost no preventive/educational efforts on university campuses

11 or in organizational workplaces there, the few studies on SH conducted in Israel (e.g., Herzog, 2007; Rimalt, 2005; Zeira et al, 2002) show that it constitutes a severe problem there. Therefore, a new law for the avoidance and treatment of SH, both in the workplace and beyond it, both against women and men, and detailing a specific list of forbidden behaviors, was legislated in 1998. Since its legislation, some male workers were fired from the public sector, and severe criminal punishments, among them periods of imprisonment, were imposed on the harassers. Moreover, it has been argued that the content, scope, and rational of this law were very influenced by the activity of a coalition of feminist forces, both from the judicial field, the political area, and the academics; thus it may be seen as a success of the feminist movement in Israel (see Herzog, 2007; Rimalt, 2005). (5) Like most societies, Israel's population is historically patriarchal, with its traditions rooted in religious (Jewish and Islamic) influences, that prescribe a subordinate status to women within the household and in society (Brownmiller, 1975). This situation of male superiority continues to be reflected in the economic, occupational, political and educational spheres, and sustained by the Israeli societys continuous state of conflict and war. However, similarly to other Western societies, the Israeli society has also been exposed to egalitarian social norms over the last decades, bringing about both the changing of traditional family structures, the growing entering of women into the labor force, and as said the legislation of additions such as SH - to the criminal law (e.g., Rimalt, 2005). Nonetheless, as in most Western countries, the occupational structure continues to be segregated, women often work in female dominated occupations, and their wages are still lower than their male counterparts (see Kraus, 2002). Note, however, that academic and social research in womens issues in Israel, together with the activities of these womens

12 groups and their influence on the Israeli government, has resulted in tremendous progress in public awareness of gender topics in recent decades there. Among other things, this social change has been expressed in increased media coverage, funds and legislation pertaining to gender-equality projects and, particularly, to the reduction of domestic violence. In the Israeli criminal justice system, the informal policy of avoiding arrest in domestic violence cases has been replaced with formal policies requiring both the arrest of violent husbands, and court-ordered treatment for them, and also procedural changes to facilitate the issuance of restraining orders against offenders. (6) Note that terrorist, military, and criminal acts directly related to the IsraelPalestine conflict were excluded from the study: it only detailed criminal acts typically committed both in Israel and abroad, hence enhancing the opportunity to generalize our findings to other national contexts and the study's internal validity. (7) Israel's population is multicultural, with many diverse religious and ethnic groups the most important are a Jewish majority, and an Arab (mostly Muslim) minority. In this regard, such groups, which are traditionally under-represented and even ignored in other samples of Western countries, are well represented in this population and sample (see Zeira et al, 2002). (8) Israel's small population around 7 million people - facilitates the collection of a national sample accurately representing the various social and cultural groups that form the public.

Method
Unlike almost all the studies in this area (for some exceptions see MacMillan et al, 2000; Zeira et al, 2002), the research data of this study were collected from a large,

13 representative, random, national sample, in this case of the adult Israeli population (n = 660); thus increasing considerably the generalizability of the findings. The most recent Israeli telephone directories at the time of the study (2008), covering all geographical regions, provided the sampling framework, and the application of a systematic random sampling method assured identical probability of inclusion of all households listed (no other technique, such as interview schedule was applied).8 The research sample was 54 percent female, 79 percent Jewish, 68 percent secular, and 86 percent were veteran citizens more than five years in Israel. These data show overall a close fit to the official data on the Israeli adult population in the year in which the survey was conducted (52 percent women; 77 percent Jewish; 63 percent secular; 83 percent veteran) (CBS, 2008). Moreover, about two thirds of the sample reported monthly familial incomes higher than 5,000 NIS (about $1,000 US). This finding is also compatible with economic characteristics of the population (mean familial income: 7,500 NIS). Finally, the sample was highly heterogeneous in terms of age (mean age: 36.33 years; SD = 14.28; range: 14-83), and the educational level of the respondents was relatively high (13.73 schooling years, i.e., some post-secondary education; SD = 2.35; range 6-21). Compared with the general population, there is a bias in the direction of older and consequently more educated respondents, due to the exclusion of very young respondents. In this regard, it should be added here other advantages of the present study. First, with very few exceptions (see MacMillan et al, 2000), most empirical research on SH is often based on surveys of relatively small, non-representative samples of volunteer students, selected workers, clinical populations, or of workers in selected occupations, within the context of explicit power differentials - e.g., teacher-student; bossemployee (see for example DeSouza & Solberg, 2004; Fitzgerald et al, 1995;

14 Goldberg & Zhang, 2004; Gruber, 1992; Marshall, 2005; Osman, 2004). The small, non-representative nature of many of these samples of course hampers direct comparisons across studies (Antecol & Cobb-Clark, 2004). As mentioned, unlike almost all the aforementioned studies, and following some suggestions made in the literature (see Sigal et al, 2005), respondents in this study formed part of a large, representative national sample.9 Second, instead of focusing on a simple form of SH for evaluation, the present study took into account the complexity and heterogeneity of these acts, among them different expressions of the Fitzgerald and others' (1997) typology. Thus it was based on the subjective evaluation of multidimensional scenarios, constructed by the factorial-survey approach (detailed later). Third, and unlike other studies, additional both SH and non-SH crime scenarios, representing many kinds of criminal offenses, were added to the analyses for control purposes. These improvements should considerably increase both the generalization, and the internal validity of the findings. Respondents seriousness perceptions of hypothetical SH and other offenses scenarios (n = 3,300 scenarios: 5 scenarios x 660 respondents) were collected by anonymous questionnaires, administered by means of a telephone survey (see also MacMillan et al, 2000) - response rate = a high 68 percent; interview length: 7-10 minutes.10 Data collection took place from mid March 2008 through mid May 2008. A content analysis of Israels major newspapers around the time of the survey revealed no coverage of irregular SH and other offenses committed, which might have affected respondents attitudes. Each questionnaire was relatively short and included five different randomly-chosen hypothetical crime scenarios for evaluation, randomly sampled from the population of possible offenses' scenarios. These scenarios included both some forms of SH and

15 non-SH criminal cases (for control purposes), constructed using the factorial-survey approach (detailed in the following, see a sample scenario at the end of Appendix 1). In addition, the questionnaire finally included a number of questions about respondents demographical information. The language of the questionnaire was kept as simple as possible, and the students who served as surveyors were carefully trained by the researcher to minimize potential biases.

The research design

To overcome the drawbacks of direct polling (see Applegate et al, 1993; Durham et al, 1996; Finkel, 1995; Jacoby & Cullen, 1999; Roberts, 1992), I adopted for this study the scenario method developed by social scientists, whereby respondents are asked to evaluate hypothetical, short crime situations (vignettes). By this approach, and unlike poll-surveys, respondents are presented with a more complex, evaluative task that approximates real-life situations more closely, and leaves less room for interpretative variation. This approach has been used widely in assessing public perceptions of the seriousness of a variety of offenses (e.g., Rossi et al, 1974; Sellin & Wolfgang, 1964; Wolfgang et al, 1985), including SH (DeSouza & Solberg, 2004; Gruber, 1992; Osman, 2004; Sigal et al, 2005; Terrance et al, 2004). However, cognizant of both the complexity and heterogeneity of SH cases, and the importance of the systematic examination of the effect of factors surrounding the case that may influence public attitudes toward it, some researchers (including the author in this chapter) have decided to present their respondents with a range of scenarios representing various situations of violent acts by men against women, including SH, for evaluation, in which few of its main characteristics varied orthogonally (e.g., DeSouza & Solberg, 2004; Osman, 2004; Sigal et al, 2005; Stockdale et al, 2002;

16 Terrance et al, 2004). As hypothesized, some of these scenario variables had significant influences on public perceptions of such cases. One of the primary weaknesses of the simple scenario approach, however, is its inability to take into account multiple factors surrounding the scenario that may influence public perceptions of it (Applegate et al, 1993; Jacoby & Cullen, 1999; Roberts, 1992). This is especially correct while analyzing complex phenomena, such as SH. This problem was overcome in this study by applying a factorial-design methodology. Generally speaking, this technique uses multidimensional hypothetical scenarios presented in a form that combines the benefits of controlled, randomized experimental designs and conventional surveys (see Rossi & Anderson, 1982). By this technique, the crime scenarios used in this study were created by randomly selecting values (levels) from each of several variables (dimensions; one level per dimension per scenario), until each dimension was represented and a complete scenario was formed (for a detail of this study's dimensions and values, see Appendix 1). Thus, all scenarios considered in this study represented a random sample of all possible scenarios available from the universe of all levels across the chosen dimensions. Rossi and Anderson (1982) note that by permitting multiple dimensions to vary randomly across scenarios (in this case, crime scenarios representing SH and other offenses), and by controlling the personal characteristics of the respondents, this technique allows for exploration of the effects of several variables simultaneously, while permitting unbiased estimates of the contributions of each of them to the overall judgment of the respondent. Moreover, due to their complete randomization, scenario dimensions cannot covary either with respondent's characteristics or with themselves (Denk et al, 1997). Given these advantages, this method has been already applied to examine various criminological and sociological issues.

17 This possibility of controlling both scenario variables and respondent's characteristics seems to be decisive, particularly in studies such the present one. First, because SH is a complex, multidimensional phenomenon, some variables related to these scenarios (such as, personal characteristics of offenders and victims, beyond gender), were expected to have a considerable influence on respondents attitudes about them, affirming the old saw, the devil being in the details (Finkel et al, 2000: 1133). For example, previous research indicates that both verbal and nonverbal behaviors on the part of the SH victim may influence perceptions of SH (e.g., Romito et al, 2004; Terrance et al, 2004). Second, as previously stated, it was also assumed that when the scenarios would reflect male-against-female violent situations, such as SH, these perceptions would be affected especially by respondents gender (see Kalof et al, 2001; Stockdale et al, 2002; Terrance et al, 2004).11

Research variables
Respondents were asked to judge each scenario appearing in his/her questionnaire subjectively on two levels: by evaluating its perceived seriousness (by selecting a value from a Likert scale ranging from 1 = Not serious at all to 11 = Very serious), and by determining the most appropriate punishment for it (by choosing one option from life imprisonment, a certain number of years in prison, and other less serious punishment; see Appendix 1). Because the findings for the punishment variable were very similar to those of the seriousness variable, and to conserve space, only the latter were presented. As a result, the seriousness scores assigned to the scenarios constituted the dependent variable of the research. Note that research has consistently reported a high correspondence between subjective evaluations of seriousness and of appropriate sentence severity: higher evaluations of seriousness

18 usually lead to more severe punishments recommended for the offenders (e.g., Russell & Trigg, 2004). Because the seriousness scale was essentially a wide-order scale (more than 10 values), it was used as an interval scale. To increase the uniformity of the evaluative task, respondents were instructed at the beginning of the interview to base their responses on their subjective evaluation of the scenarios, and not on their knowledge of the (Israeli) criminal law (see Herzog, 2003; Rossi et al, 1974; Sellin & Wolfgang, 1964). Nevertheless, the possibility that the respondents' evaluations are affected by the prevailing law cannot be excluded (see Blumstein & Cohen, 1980). Moreover they were informed that there were no right or wrong answers, and that they should give their honest reactions to the situation (Osman, 2004). The independent (predictor) and control variables for this study were derived from two sources: first, from the randomly assigned factorial dimensions within the scenarios (see Appendix 1), and second, from the respondent characteristics, obtained at the end of the questionnaire, after the evaluation of the scenarios. Based on the multidimensional characterization of SH events and other offenses, all scenarios presented to the respondents contained seven dimensions: two related to the offense act (criminal offense and degree of harm, dimensions A and B), and five to the offender's and victim's characteristics (ethnicity and age, and offender's criminal record, dimensions C to I). Note that situationally, many non-verbal cues, such as provocative dress, have been found to lead to perceptions of sexual willingness, even when a woman says "no" to sex (Osman, 2004). Thus, an additional dimension victim's dressing (J) - was chosen to be randomly included only in the SH scenarios (see also Herzog, 2007). As stated, to construct a given scenario, one level from

19 within each of these dimensions was selected, with each given equal probability within each dimension (see sample scenarios in Appendix 1). Note that despite the use of the factorial-design methodology, some characteristics were kept uniform across all of the evaluated scenarios. First, all of the acts were described in such a way that there could be no question as to the responsibility of the offenders, and the consequences of their acts. Second, because logic suggests that any increase in the number of offenders and victims would significantly affect the perceived gravity of the incident, all of the scenarios involved a single offender and a single victim. In line with the studys hypotheses, and to compare public perceptions of the seriousness of SH with other criminal offenses, the type of offense represented in the scenario formed the first independent variable in this study (variable A). This variable was one of the various randomly assigned factorial variables within the crime scenarios (see Appendix 1). Hence, crime scenarios representing alternatively SH situations, offenders and victims (defined according to the aforementioned definition), and a wide range of offenses serving for control purposes, were randomly presented to the respondents for evaluation. The latter were highly diverse, ranging from very grave (e.g., murder) to very minor (e.g., tax evasion), and included violent (inflicted by men against women), property (the same), and victimless offenses (committed by men). Due to the similarity between SH and acts of male violence against women, in addition to the SH scenarios, some other directly referred to three such acts - intimate murder, domestic assault and rape were added. Although Israeli respondents may not be familiar with actual punishment of harassers, to avoid influencing the respondents, the phenomenon of SH was not specifically mentioned in the scenarios.

20 As mentioned, it was also expected that characteristics of the respondents and of the offenses, offenders, and victims as described in the scenarios would influence public perceptions of seriousness. Among the respondent characteristics, and as formulated in the third hypothesis, because both traditional gender-role attitudes and tolerance toward male violence against women, including SH, vary considerably by social group, especially by gender (e.g., Falchikov, 1996; and also religiosity, and ethnicity: e.g., Wyatt & Riederle, 1995), it was expected that these characteristics of the respondents would influence significantly their perceptions toward the seriousness of SH. Thus, these variables constitute also independent variables in this study. Consequently, the control variables for this study were derived from two sources: first, from the respondents remaining personal characteristics, and second, from the randomly remaining assigned factorial variables, related to the offenders and victims personal characteristics and the offenders' act, within the crime scenarios (see Appendix 1).

Results
Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations, and based on the means, the relative ranking of the seriousness (dependent variable) of the three male-againstfemale SH offenses represented in the scenarios (first independent variable), evaluated by the whole sample of respondents. For ease of understanding, the offense values appear in descending order of seriousness, according to the ranking of the presented whole sample of respondents. [Insert Table 1 about here] Table 1 shows that among the SH scenarios, those showing a sexual coercion obtained the highest seriousness mean (9.44 ; maximum value = 11) and the smallest

21 standard deviations. After them, we found the unwanted sexual attention SH (seriousness of 7.73), and finally as the least serious SH, the hostile environment SH (seriousness of 7.10), with relatively higher standard deviations. Widening the picture, Table 2 presents the means, standard deviations, and based on the means, the relative ranking of 12 male-against-female offenses represented in the scenarios (first independent variable: SH and control values), rated by the whole sample of respondents, with regard to their perceived seriousness. [Insert Table 2 about here] Table 2 shows that the respondents assigned the SH scenarios relatively high seriousness means (9.95, 9.02 and 8.33, respectively, out of a maximum of 11) and that standard deviations were relatively wide (1.95, 2.37 and 2.95), denoting some heterogeneity in respondents attitudes to them. Moreover, compared with various other forms of criminal offenses, always committed by men against women, these scenarios may be placed in a relatively high-order position. Note however that, first, scenarios representing violent criminal acts, such as rape and intimate murder, received relatively higher seriousness scores than the three SH scenarios. Second, sexual coercion scenarios were evaluated as relatively more serious than some other violent offenses (domestic violence), and all the property (robbery, burglary, and shoplifting) and victimless offenses (drug use and tax evasion). Third, unwanted sexual attention SH scenarios was ranked in a relatively high fifth place, although after domestic violence, but before (that is, more seriously) than robbery and violence against an acquaintance. Fourth and finally, hostile environment SH cases appeared at the relatively high ninth place, although after burglary, but before other property and victimless offenses, such as shoplifting, drug use and tax evasion.

22 The influence of both scenarios variables and respondents' characteristics on seriousness values given to the scenarios were also analyzed by a multivariate OLS regression model, while controlling for both the scenario dimensions and the respondents' personal characteristics (control variables). Table 3 presents the unstandardized regression coefficients and standard errors of these variables on the seriousness variable, while applied only on the SH scenarios. In this context of regression analyses, note that a potential response bias could be present in respondents judgments because each of them responded to five different scenarios, and the latter were treated in this study as units of analysis (see Hox et al., 1991). To overcome this possible problem, these regression analyses were also conducted using Hierarchical Linear Models software, which takes this possible problem into consideration. These latter analyses yielded findings that were very similar to the former; to conserve space, only the OLS data are presented. [Insert Table 3 about here] Table 3 shows that compared with all the control variables in this study, respondents' gender was the most influential variable in the regression model: as the respondents were female, their perceptions of the SH scenarios were significantly more serious, than in the case of male respondents. Despite the importance of this variable, note that other control variables also showed statistically significant coefficients. Among the different respondents' characteristics, their views on SH scenarios were specially influenced by religiosity unlike others, more religious respondents had significantly more serious views of SH , country of birth respondents that were born in former USSR had significantly less serious views of SH than respondents that were born in other places -, and education more educated respondents had significantly more serious views of SH than less educated ones. In

23 addition, when analyzing the influence of the factorial dimensions in the scenarios, we can see that when the SH offense was relatively lighter, and when the women were wearing a miniskirt, the seriousness scores were significantly lower. However, in the cases in which the offender had a criminal record, the views on the scenarios were significantly more serious.

Discussion and conclusions

The aim of the present study was to assess public perceptions of the seriousness of SH multidimensional scenarios and to compare them to parallel seriousness perceptions of non-SH scenarios. This study chose the consensus model of the criminal law as its theoretical frame, and analyzed whether the formal recognition of SH in criminal codes reflected public views on this issue. The hypotheses of this study were supported by the findings. When evaluating different SH scenarios, varying randomly on a number of variables and representing common SH situations, a large and representative sample of Israeli respondents perceived them to be at different places on a seriousness ranking. Thus these findings suggest that, like most Western criminal statutes, the public tends to perceive SH not uniformly, but as a variable offense, in which its particular characteristics influence its perception. That is, respondents did distinguish between the sexual harassing natures of different forms of behaviors (see Terrance et al, 2004). However, it can be clearly concluded that according to the findings the Israeli public perceives generally SH cases as relatively serious events, and tends to experience relatively high levels of revulsion against such conducts. This situation accurately reflects the theoretical principles of the consensus model: generally speaking it seems to exist a wide agreement among most Israeli social groups concerning the definition

24 of SH in general, and particularly on the seriousness of the SH events that were described, thus they were perceived as relatively serious criminal acts. As a result, it can be added that this agreement is accurately reflected in the Israeli criminal code. However, and more importantly for this study, the findings also indicate that the particular public views towards SH events does not seem to reflect the arguments of the consensus model exactly. As shown in Table 1, Israeli respondents did not consider SH as an indivisible criminal entity. On the contrary, they differentiate, according to Fitzgerald and her associates' typology, between the different expressions of SH. Accordingly, this study indicates that the (Israeli) public does take into account the specific details of the SH scene in assessing the seriousness of SH cases; hence, they assigned significantly different seriousness scores to different SH scenarios, varying randomly in their main characteristics. Consistent with the aforementioned typology, these findings show that the Israeli public does not perceive all SH cases as equally serious. In this context, the Israeli public does differentiate between SH committed as part of sexual coercion by the harasser on her victim, and other less serious forms of SH, that do include other forms of harassment. This finding implies that the current wide use of the formal concept of SH and the formal lack of recognition of different forms of SH events as separate categories of SH in criminal statutes seem not to reflect the general public will or sentiment (commonsense justice; Finkel, 1995) on this issue. Accordingly, from a consensually or democratic theoretical perspective, if the criminal law is supposed to reflect public attitudes, these findings support social calls for a reassessment, and even a differentiation, of SH cases in criminal statutes. In this context, it could be asked whether it is possible to generalize the findings obtained in the Israeli context to other societies. The answer to this question,

25 according to this chapter's author, must surely be in the affirmative. First, as already noted, based on English common law, the Israeli criminal law on SH is organized very similarly to criminal statutes in other Western countries. Second, this study excluded terrorist events and ideologically motivated acts of violence, which could have set Israeli respondents apart from equivalent respondents in other countries. As also stated, this study analyzed only SH and non-SH acts typically committed in Israel and abroad. Third, the regression findings showed that personal characteristics of respondents, beyond gender, although affecting the findings, were not at all the most influential variables affecting respondents attitudes toward the scenarios. Nevertheless, further investigation of public attitudes toward SH and non-SH acts in other national contexts is highly recommended. Finally, the question remains, To what extent should social perceptions and public attitudes toward crime issues and, in particular, toward hard or mitigating circumstances of SH, be taken into account in determining public policy and changes in the criminal law? On the one hand, it is often argued that the views of the public at large regarding the criminal law should be an important factor in the considerations and deliberations of policymakers and the criminal justice system, especially in democratic systems. It is, indeed, crucial that the criminal code enjoy the respect of those who are served by it. Research has made it clear that public beliefs and preferences, particularly concerning crime seriousness, exert an important influence on criminal justice policy and on sentencing (for a review, see Roberts, 1992). According to this view, legislators, and courts should be very interested in the empirical assessment of public attitudes such as those assessed in this study. On the other hand, however, it could also be argued that, as social scientists, pollsters and Supreme Court justices have consistently recognized, the responding

26 public may sometimes be ignorant about the criminal and judicial issues at hand, and even when the public has clear attitudes toward such issues, public opinion is usually not stable or fixed in time and space; rather it changes across time, only representing a transitory view, affected mainly by the media, which typically presented inaccurate, unrepresentative, and prejudicial information (e.g., Finkel, 1995; Finkel et al., 2000; Roberts, 1992). As a result, some of the variables found to have a significant effect on public views of the seriousness of criminal events, such as victim's dress, are essentially extra-legal. Moreover, empirical findings are often presented showing that, also influenced especially by the media, people in general, and juries in particular, have stereotypical pictures of typical crime events and their perpetrators, containing discriminatory notions of human nature, motivation and more (Roberts, 1992). For these reasons, some may support the view of the formal law as independent of, and hermetically sealed from, community sentiment, opposing the public influence on public policy (Finkel, 1995: 15). Despite the effort invested in this study to overcome theoretical and methodological obstacles, its limitations should be taken into account when analyzing its conclusions. First, due to the factorial survey approach and other aforementioned methodological considerations, this research was based on a single (seriousness) evaluation of short hypothetical scenarios depicting typical crime situations. In this context, it may be argued that despite their statistical significance, some of the differences between SH and non-SH scenarios, were relatively small. Hence, further analysis of the question and hypothesis raised by the present study, using other survey techniques and/or with more extensive descriptions of SH and non-SH criminal situations, and with additional dependent variables, is also highly recommended. Second, the scope of the present study did not encompass important questions raised by the sociology of law

27 (briefly detailed in the introduction of this study), such as the influence of formal law on public sentiment. Further research into these issues is nevertheless required.

28

Notes
1. Victims of SH often suffer short- and long-term effects. Among the symptoms a SH victim may feel, we can state out: confusion, self-blame, fear, anxiety, depression, anger, disillusionment, friendlessness, powerlessness, and helplessness (Kisa et al, 2002). 2. It is estimated that the actual reporting of SH incidents remains low. Among the reasons we can state that: many women may feel uncomfortable with the situation, or believe that no one will believe them or address the situation, or may fear retaliation (Kisa et al, 2002). 3. In this regard, note that although most acts of SH are committed by male acquaintances of the female victims, especially at work settings (i.e., supervisors, coworkers, teachers), stranger harassment is typical of public spaces such as streets, and also occurs in the form of obscene phone calls. In both last forms, the fact that the perpetrator is not known to the victim makes such experiences particularly difficult to anticipate, and therefore avoid. In light of the abundance of research on SH in workplaces and academic settings, stranger SH deserves similar attention. This form of SH is seen as having detrimental impact on women's perceived safety (MacMillan et al, 2000). 4. In this regard, understanding public perceptions of SH is especially important given a legal environment that relies on a reasonable (woman) victim standard to make determinations of SH cases (see Antecol & Cobb-Clark, 2004). 5. Note that these are the more frequently models cited in the literature. However despite the importance of these opposing paradigms and due to the dichotomous nature of these models, more sophisticated models have been recently formulated. For example, see Rossi and Berk (1985). Recently, in a series of empirical and theoretical

29 studies, Finkel (e.g., 1995: 2; et al., 2000: 591) has reconceptualized this question in terms of discrepancies between two types of law: black-letter law, or the formal law on the books, enacted by legislators, studied by law students and interpreted by judges, and commonsense justice, reflecting what ordinary people perceive as just and fair and think the law ought to be. 6. For other studies using SH scenarios, see: Osman, 2004; Saguy, 2003; Sigal et al, 2005; Stockdale et al, 2002; Terrance et al, 2004. For another study in which respondents were asked to suggest punishment for the harasser, see Sigal et al (2005). 7. This is particularly relevant for democratic systems, founded on the principles of elected representation and popular control of the law by the citizenry; hence, the law should reflect the majority's public views (see Roberts, 1992; Thomas et al, 1976; Warr et al, 1982). Accordingly, public opinion concerning SH should play a significant role in the formulation of public policy in SH issues. 8. According to formal data of the Israeli Ministry of Communications (personal communication), 98 percent of Israel households are connected to the phone system. Based on these data, the percentage of people unlisted in the directories seems to be fairly low. In addition, although ideally we would like to gather as much information as possible from each respondent, the decisions regarding the number of variables to include in each scenario and the number of scenarios to present to each respondent were pre-tested and guided by methodological considerations, such as: to obtain respondents willingness to participate in the phone surveys, interview length, full understanding of the scenarios, to maintain respondents' focus throughout the interview, and to allow enough observations for each research condition to achieve sufficient statistical power for the data analyses. Accordingly, I limited each questionnaire to five crime scenarios, and a small number of demographic variables.

30 9. The questionnaire was written in Hebrew, but translated into Arabic and Russian for these minority groups. The response rate was calculated on the basis of valid household numbers, excluding businesses, fax connections, etc. To boost response rates, respondents who could not be initially reached were contacted again. A household was replaced after three unsuccessful attempts. The question arises whether the missing individuals were special in some way and/or whether they did not reply because of the questions. Non-response is a typical problem with difficult and sensitive themes such as SH, so it may have affected this study (Fasting et al, 2004: 378). However, because the sample was representative of the adult Israeli population, it may be assumed that no important groups were under-represented in it. Because the household's owner, whose name appears in the telephone directory was not necessarily the person who answers the survey, the questionnaire remains anonymous. The questionnaire was also pre-tested with a small number of respondents in order to obtain an initial test of the measures reliability and to test for any unexpected response patterns (none were found). 10. The advantages of this survey method (see also MacMillan et al, 2000) include: the access to a large number of respondents in a relatively short period of time, the relative ease of obtaining a broad, nationally representative sample, at a relatively low cost, the ease of standardizing responses for comparison, the minimal danger of the researcher biasing the respondents, and the high level of anonymity prior to completion of the survey respondents were assured that confidentiality and the anonymity of their responses would be maintained (see Kisa et al, 2002). In addition, note that cause and effect relationships have not been shown directly in SH because of the ethical problems of setting up an experimental situation in which someone might

31 become a harasser or a victim. As a result, studies of SH depend on surveys, quasiexperimental and correlational research designs. 11. Despite the use of the factorial-design methodology, note that the construction of the scenarios deviated slightly from complete randomization. Because some of them may have lacked mundane realism, a few combinations of values were excluded, causing no problems of multicolinearity. For example, SH acts referred only to men against women acts, and violent acts against women cases refer only to heterosexual relationships. In addition, previous researchers have suggested that it is easier for a women than for men to imagine themselves in the victim's situation possibly because of women's inferior position in society and of their greater experience with, and therefore, greater knowledge of, SH (DeSouza & Solberg, 2004). Moreover, because of their lack of experience with SH, men have a less well-developed cognitive framework for interpreting SH. However, no significant gender effect on perceptions of SH was found for same-sex SH (Goldberg & Zhang, 2004). In addition, studies have documented that Black women and white women have different perceptions of what constitutes SH. Black women consider racially based comments and stereotypes are very sexually harassing (Kalof et al, 2001). Thus the importance of controlling also for respondent's ethnicity.

32

Bibliographical list references

Antecol, H. & Cobb-Clark, D. (2004). The changing nature of employment related sexual harassment: Evidence form the U.S. federal government, 1978-1994. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 57 (3): 443-461. Applegate, B., Wright, J., Dunaway, R., Cullen, F. & Wooldredge, J. (1993). Victim-offender race and support for capital punishment: A factorial design approach. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 18 (1): 95-115. Ashbaugh, L. P. & Cornell, D. G. (2008). Sexual harassment and bullying behaviors in sixth-graders. Journal of School Violence, 7 (2): 21-38. Barak, A. (2005). Sexual harassment in the Internet. Social Science Computer Review, 23 (1): 77-92. Blumstein, A. & Cohen, J. (1980). Sentencing of convicted offenders: An analysis of the publics view. Law and Society Review, 14 (2): 233-261. Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our Will: Men, Women, and Rape. New York: Simon and Schuster. CBS - Central Bureau of Statistics (2008). Statistical abstract of Israel. Jerusalem: Central Bureau of Statistics. Chambliss, W. J. & Seidman, R. B. (1971). Law, Order, and Power. Mass.: AddisonWesley. Denk, C., Benson, J., Fletcher, J. & Reigel, T. (1997). How do Americans want to die? A factorial vignette survey of public attitudes about end-of-life medical decision-making. Social Science Research, 26: 95-120. DeSouza, E. & Solberg, J. (2004). Women's and men's reactions to man-to-man sexual harassment: Does the sexual orientation of the victim matter? Sex Roles, 50 (9/10): 623-639.

33 Durham, A., Elrod, H., & Kinkade, P. (1996). Public support for the death penalty: Beyond Gallup. Justice Quarterly, 13 (4): 705-736. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC; 1993). Guidelines on Discrimination because of Sex. 29 CFR 1609.1. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Falchikov, Nancy (1996). Adolescent attitudes to abuse of women: Are wives and non-marital partners viewed differently? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11 (3): 391-409. Fasting, K., Branckenridge, C. & Sundgot-Borgen, J. (2004). Prevalence of sexual harassment among Norwegian female elite athletes in relation to sport type. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 39 (4): 373-386. Finkel, N. J. (1995) Commonsense Justice: Jurors Notions of the Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. , Burke, J. E. & Chavez, L. J. (2000). Commonsense judgments of infanticide: Murder, manslaughter, madness, or miscellaneous? Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6 (4), 1113-1137. Fitzgerald, L. F., Gelfand, M. J. & Drasgow, F. (1995). Measuring sexual harassment: Theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17 (4): 425-445. Fitzgerald, L. F., Drasgow, F., Hullin, C., Gelfand, M. J. & Magley, V. (1997). Antecedents and consequence of sexual harassment in organizations: A test of an integrated model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82 (3): 578-89. Goldberg, C. & Zhang, L. (2004). Simple and joint effects of gender and self-esteem on responses to same-sex sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 50 (11/12): 823-833. Gruber, J.E. (1992). A typology of personal and environmental sexual harassement:

34 Research and policy implications for the 1990's. Sex Roles, 26: 447-464. , Smith, M. D. & Kauppinen-Toropainen, K. (1996). An exploration of sexual harassment experiences and severity: Results from North America and Europe. In M. Stockdale & B. Gutek (Eds.), Women and Work: Sexual Harassment. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Herzog, S. (2003). The relationship between public perceptions of crime seriousness and support for plea bargaining practices in Israel: A factorial-survey approach. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 94 (1): 103-132. (2007). Public perceptions of sexual harassment: An empirical analysis in Israel from consensus and feminist theoretical perspectives. Sex Roles, October issue: 579-592. Hox, Joop J., Ita G.G. Kreft & Piet L. Hermkins (1991). The analysis of factorial surveys. Sociological Methods and Research, 19: 493-510. Jacoby, J. & Cullen, F. (1999). The structure of punishment norms: Applying the Rossi-Berk model. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 89 (1): 245-307. Kalof, L., Eby, K., Matheson, J. & Kroska, R. (2001). The influence of race and gender on student self-reports of sexual harassment by college professors. Gender & Society, 15 (2): 282-302. Kisa, A., Dziegielewski, S. & Ates, M. (2002). Sexual harassment and its consequences: A study within Turkish hospitals. Journal of Health & Social Policy, 15 (1): 77-94. Kraus, V. (2002). Secondary Breadwinners: Israeli Women in the Labour Force. Westport, CT: Praeger. Landau, I. (2003). Sexual harassment and the "repetition requirement." Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34 (1): 79-83.

35 MacKinnon, (1979). The Sexual Harassment of Working Women: A Case of Sex Discrimination. New Haven: Yale University Press. MacMillan, R., Nierobisz, A. & Welsh, S. (2000). Experiencing the streets: Harassment and perceptions of safety among women. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 37 (3): 306-322. Marshall, A. (2005). Idle rights: Employees' rights consciousness and the construction of sexual harassment policies. Law & Society Review, 39 (1): 83-123. Osman, S. L. (2004). Victim resistance: Theory and data on understanding perceptions of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 50 (3/4): 267-275. Quinney, R. (1975). Crime control in capitalist society. In I. Taylor, P. Walton & J. Young (Eds.), Critical Criminology. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Rimalt, Noya (2005). On sex, sexuality and respect: The law for the prevention of sexual harassment under the test of feminist theory and legal reality. Mishpatim, 35, 601-654 [in Hebrew]. Roberts, J. (1992). Public opinion, crime and criminal justice. Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, 16. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Romito, P., Ballard, T. & Maton, N. (2004). Sexual harassment among female personnel in an Italian hospital. Violence Against Women, 10 (4): 386-417. Rossi, P. & Anderson, A. (1982). The factorial survey approach: An introduction. In P. Rossi & S. Nock (Eds.), Measuring Social Judgments: The Factorial Survey Approach. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Rossi, P. & Berk, R. (1985). Varieties of normative consensus. American Sociological Review, 50: 333-347. (1997). Just Punishments: Federal Guidelines and Public Views Compared. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

36 Rossi, P. et al. (1974). The seriousness of crimes: Normative structure and individual differences. American Sociological Review, 39 (2): 224-237. Russell, B. L. & Trigg, K. Y. (2004). Tolerance of sexual harassment: An examination of gender differences, ambivalent sexism, social dominance, and gender roles. Sex Roles, 50 (7/8): 565-573. Saguy, Abigail C. (2003). What is Sexual Harrasment? From Capitol Hill to the Sorbonne. Berkeley: University of California Press. Samuels, H. (2004). A defining moment: A feminist perspective on the law of sexual harassment in the workplace in the light of the Equal Treatment Amendment directive. Feminist Legal Studies, 12: 181-211. Sbraga, Tamara Penix & O'Donohue, William (2000). Sexual harassment. Annual Review of Sex Research, 11: 258-285. Sellin, T. & M. Wolfgang (1964) The Measurement of Delinquency. New York: Wiley. Sigal, J. et al. (2005). Cross-cultural reactions to academic sexual harassment: Effects of individualist vs. collectivist culture and gender of participants. Sex Roles, 52 (3/4): 201-215. Stockdale, M. S., O'Connor, M., Gutek, B. & Geer, T. (2002). The relationship between prior sexual abuse and reactions to sexual harassment. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 8 (1): 64-95. Tang, C. S., Yik, M. S., Cheung, F. M., Choi, P. & Au, K. (1996). Sexual harassment of Chinese college students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 25: 201-215. Terrance, C., Logan, A. & Peters, D. (2004). Perceptions of peer sexual harassment among high school students. Sex Roles, 51 (7/8): 479-490. Thomas, A. M. (2004). Politics, policies and practice: Assessing the impact of sexual

37 harassment policies in UK universities. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 25 (2): 143-160. Thomas, C. et al. (1976). Public opinion on criminal law and legal sanctions: An examination of two conceptual models. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 67: 110-116. Till, F. (1980). Sexual harassment: A Report on the Sexual Harassment of Students. Washington, D.C.: National Advisory Council on Women's Educational Programs. Timmerman, G. & Bajema, C. (1999). Sexual harassment in Northwest Europe: A cross-cultural comparison. The European Journal of Women's Studies, 6: 419-439. U.S. Health Care Financing Administration (1994). Sexual Harassment. Fact Sheet. U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (1987). Sexual Harassment in the Federal Government: An Update. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office. Warr, M. et al. (1982). Contending theories of criminal law: Statutory penalties versus public preferences. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 19 (1): 25-46. Welsh, Sandy, Dawson, Myrna, & Nierobisz, Annette (2002). Legal factors, extralegal factors, or changes in the law? Using criminal justice research to understand the resolution of sexual harassment complaints. Social Problems, 49 (4): 605-623. Wolfgang, M. et al. (1985) The National Survey of Crime Severity. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Wyatt, G. E. & Riederle, M. (1995). The prevalence and context of sexual harassment among African American and white American women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 10: 309-321. Zeira, A., Astor, R. A. & Benbenishty, R. (2002). Sexual harassment in Jewish and Arab public schools in Israel. Child Abuse & Neglect, 26: 149-166.

38 Table 1: Comparison of the mean rating and significance ranking of the seriousness of, and punishment for, the three men-against-female, SH scenarios, by the whole sample.
Dependent variable (n) Scenarios (n) Sexual coercion (314) Unwanted sexual attention (287) Hostile environment SH (290) Seriousness Mean SD Rank 9.95 1.95 1 9.02 8.33 2.37 2.95 2 3

39 Table 2: Comparison of the mean rating and significance ranking of the seriousness of, and punishment for, men-against-female, 12 criminal offenses, including three of SH, by the whole sample
Dependent variable Scenarios (n) Rape (254) Intimate murder (199) Sexual coercion SH (289) Domestic violence (232) Unwanted sexual attention SH (315) Shop robbery (314) Acquaintaince violence (287) Apartment burglary (290) Hostile environment SH (201) Shoplifting (274) Drug use (327) Tax evasion (286) Seriousness Mean SD Rank 10.39 1.41 1 10.08 1.76 2 9.95 1.95 3 9.44 2.19 4 9.02 2.37 5 8.59 8.55 8.53 8.33 7.92 7.73 5.35 2.40 2.36 2.73 2.95 2.71 3.01 3.19 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

40 Table 3: Unstandardized coefficients (and standard errors) for the seriousness (1 = not serious at all; 11 = very serious) of male-against-female, three SH scenarios only, by independent and control variables
Variables Respondents gender Respondents religiosity Resp.s country of birth (dummy variable) 1 Respondents income Respondents age Respondents education Degree of offenses harm Offender's ethnicity Victim's ethnicity Offender's age (dummy variable) 2 Victim's age (dummy variable) 2 Offenders criminal record Victims dress Model data Values Scenarios Seriousness 1.39 (.15) ** .15 (.07) * -.19 (.11) * .04 (.12) .03 (.10) -.04 (.00) .10 (.03) * -0.85 (.18) * .02 (.15) -08 (.15) .05 (.14) .04 (.13) .04 (.13) .05 (.14) .60 (.16) ** -.65 (.15) * 803 .254** 10.93 (.91) **

0 = male; 1 = female 0 = secular; 1 = traditional / religious 1 = Former Soviet Union ; 0 = not 1 = Other ; 0 = not 0 = less than 5, 000 NIS ; 1 = + Interval Interval 0 = severe ; 1 = light 0 = Jewish ; 1 = Arab 0 = Jewish ; 1 = Arab 1 = 17 years old ; 0 = not 1 = 25 years old ; 0 = not 1 = 17 years old ; 0 = not 1 = 25 years old ; 0 = not 1 = Yes ; 0 = not stated 1 = miniskirt ; 0 = not stated Valid n R2 Constant

* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 1. Israel was considered the reference group. 2. "Not stated" was considered the reference group.

41

Appendix 1: Variables and values in the factorial approach

A. Criminal offense: 1. Sexual coercion SH / 2. Unwanted sexual attention SH / 3. Hostile environment SH / 4. Intimate murder / 5. Acquaintance murder / 4. Domestic violence / 5. / 6. Rape / 7. / 8. Burglary / 9. Shoplifting / 10. Robbery / 11. Tax evasion / 12. Bribe / 13. Drug selling 14. Drug use B. Degree of harm inflicted: 1. Relatively light / 2. Relatively severe C. Offenders ethnicity and D. Victims ethnicity: 1. Jewish / 2. Arab / 3. (Not stated) E. Offenders age and F. Victims age: 1. 25 years old / 2. 50 years old / 3. (Not stated) G. Offenders criminal record: 1. Yes / 2. (Not stated) H. Dressing: 1. Wear a mini-skirt / 2. (Not stated) A sample scenario: 1. A 25-year-old, Jewish man with a criminal record touched the buttocks of his 25year old Jewish secretary against her will / and although she resisted, he also kissed her on her mouth. In your opinion, how serious is this act? Not serious at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Very serious 10 11

If you were the judge in this case, what would be your decision regarding the appropriate punishment for the man? Sentence him to life imprisonment / to years of imprisonment / to other less

serious punishment (probation, community service, fine) .