This article was downloaded by: [KSU Kent State University]

On: 23 July 2014, At: 20:24

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Gender and Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cgee20
Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities
through sexual harassment: issues
of identity, power and popularity in
secondary schools
Kerry H. Robinson
a
a
University of Western Sydney , Australia
Published online: 15 Aug 2006.
To cite this article: Kerry H. Robinson (2005) Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities through sexual
harassment: issues of identity, power and popularity in secondary schools, Gender and Education,
17:1, 19-37, DOI: 10.1080/0954025042000301285
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0954025042000301285
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Gender and Education
Vol. 17, No. 1, March 2005, pp. 1937
ISSN 09540253 (print)/ISSN 13600516 (online)/05/0101919
2005 Taylor & Francis Ltd
DOI: 10.1080/0954025042000301285
Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities
through sexual harassment: issues of
identity, power and popularity in
secondary schools
Kerry H. Robinson*
University of Western Sydney, Australia
Taylor and Francis Ltd CGEE17102.sgm 10.1080/0954025042000301285 Gender and Education 0954-0253 (print)/1360-0516 (online) Original Article 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd 17 1000000March 2005 KerryH.Robinson School of EducationUniversity of Western SydneyBuilding 4, Bankstown CampusLocked Bag 1797Penrith South DCNSW1797Australiak.robinson@uws.edu.au
This paper, based on the perspectives of young men, explores the relationship between dominant
constructions of masculinities and the sexual harassment of young women in Australian secondary
schools, within a feminist poststructuralist theoretical framework. Of particular importance in this
process are the ways in which sexual harassment is integral to the construction of hegemonic hetero-
sexual masculine identities; the importance of popularity, acceptance and young mens fears within
male peer group cultures; and the utilization of sexual harassment as a means through which to
maintain and regulate hierarchical power relationships, not just in relation to gender, but how it
intersects with other sites of power such as race and class. It is highlighted that sexual harassment
is considered a legitimate and expected means through which to express and reconfirm the public
and private positions of hegemonic masculinity within a heterosexualized, racialized and classed
gender order.
Introduction
In Australia, recent cases of sexual assault of young women by groups of young men
have resulted in a reigniting of concerns in some sectors of the community, about the
position of women in society and the lack of legal and social deterrents to curb and
prevent such violence. One particular case involved the kidnapping and repeated
sexual assault of two young women at knife point over several hours from a group of
unknown male youths, before being dumped back on the streets. What seems to have
caused the most controversy in this case is threefold. Firstly, crucial evidence depict-
ing the severity of the violence was dropped as part of a plea bargain to get a guilty
*The School of Education and Early Childhood Studies, University of Western Sydney, Building
4, Bankstown Campus, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South DC NSW 1797, Australia.
Email: k.robinson@uws.edu.au
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

20 K. H. Robinson
verdict, as well as to prevent the young women having to experience the stress of
cross-examination (Sheehan, 2001). This resulted in a minimal sentence that failed
to adequately reflect the nature of the crime. Secondly, the apparent lack of remorse
expressed by the perpetrators regarding their actions towards the girls appeared to
depict a public gendered performance, tainted with misogyny that the young men
seemed to share with pride. Thirdly, there were undertones that this attack was
partially motivated by racial discrimination, an issue that was also linked to other
similar cases. The young women commented that the perpetrators, who were from an
ethnic minority background, indicated that they were targeted because they were
Australian women (Crichton, 2002). Since this critical case, the laws in the state of
New South Wales, where this incident occurred, have been changedprimarily due
to community pressures on the State government, particularly during a pre-election
period. Consequently, similar multiple rape cases have resulted in perpetrators
receiving prison sentences of up to 55 years for their involvement in such crimes
(Pryor, 2002). However, the unprecedented length of these sentences resulted in a
different community outcry in some instances, namely that racist attitudes towards
cultural minorities was behind this discriminatory sentencing.
The particular case discussed above raises crucial issues that need to be addressed
around sexual violence in communities generally, but it also has specific relevance to
the focus of this paper, which explores, through empirical evidence, the relationship
between masculinities and sexual harassment of girls in secondary schooling. This
paper reiterates all the forms of behaviour that males have enacted on females
recounted in the literature of the 1980s (see Mahoney, 1983, 1985, 1989; Lees, 1986;
Jones & Mahoney, 1989). What feminists pertinently pointed out at this time was that
sexual harassment was not about sex but about power, focusing virtually exclusively
on male power over females. However, in contrast to these earlier works, this article
highlights how sexual harassment is also significantly about male power within male
groups. In most instances, sexual harassment is not about an individuals problems,
values or lack of social skills, which reflects the perspective that prevails in the domi-
nant discourse on this behaviour, but rather is constituted within broader cultural
values and power relationships, especially those operating around gender and sexual-
ity and their intersections with other sites of difference, such as race and class. Of
particular importance to the discussion in this paper is the way in which doing hege-
monic masculinity, and how successfully this is performed, is often measured by the
dominance, aggression and intimidation shown towards the gendered other, that is
girls and women, or those boys and men who take up less dominant forms of mascu-
linities. Consequently, the use of sexual harassment and sexual violence is considered
a legitimate and expected means through which to express and reconfirm the public
and private positions of hegemonic masculinity within a heterosexualized gender
order. Sexual harassment and sexual violence become part of the performance of hege-
monic masculinity that can cement gendered cultural bonds between those boys and
men who take up this form of masculinity as their own, creating a sense of identity.
Within this context, this paper focuses on a group of boys perspectives of sexual
harassment, which are complex, often contradictory and contextually based and
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities 21
explores how many of them make meaningful their engagement in the sexual harass-
ment of girls. This involves issues such as the importance of being popular amongst
male peers; how engaging in sexual harassment can be integral to the construction of
their heterosexualized masculine identities; and how sexual harassment operates to
regulate heterosexualized gendered power relationships. Another crucial issue that is
investigated in this paper is the way that sexual harassment is utilized as an effective
means through which oppressive power relations across gender, race, ethnicity,
class, sexuality and so on are reinforced and maintained. The comments made by the
young women in the opening scenario, that the motivation for the attacks was in some
way linked not just to their gender but to their being Australian women, was met
with great controversy in some sectors of the community (Yusuf, 2001; Williams,
2001). However, it raises a crucial issue around sexual harassment and the complex
ways it can intersect with racist discourses.
Research in context
This paper is based on extensive empirical research under taken over the past ten
years, in a range of Australian government coeducational (total 12) and independent
single-sex (total two: one boys and one girls) secondary high schools. Surveys and
in-depth interviews with male and female students, teachers and administrators;
observations of classroom and school yard activities (approximately three to four
weeks was spent in each school); and focus group discussions with students and
teachers, have been employed to gather the data across several case study schools.
In-depth interviews were conducted with 112 girls and 88 boys, which were approx-
imately 4060 minutes in duration. A questionnaire targeting understandings and
experiences of sexual harassment undertaken in a single-sex boys school (148 boys)
and girls school (146 girls) provided an interesting focus on perceptions and experi-
ences outside the more frequently researched contexts of coeducation. The range of
schools provided a diverse population of students and teachers that were from a
variety of ethnicities, socio-economic backgrounds and geographical locations
including rural, coastal, industrial suburban and metropolitan areas. Students ages
ranged from 12- to 17-years.
Sexual harassment in this paper is defined by the author as any physical, visual or
sexual act experienced by a person from another person at the time or later, which
asserts a persons sexual identity over their identity as a person, which makes them
feel all or any of the following: embarrassed, frightened, hurt, uncomfortable,
degraded, humiliated or compromised; which has the further result of diminishing a
persons power and confidence.
This definition is based on those devised by Lin Farley (1978) and Jacqui Halson
(1991). The various definitions of sexual harassment given by girls and women often
do not distinguish between sexist and sexual harassment, with the two behaviours
often intimately intertwined. However, in some cases, the fact that some behaviours
are sexist rather than sexual have hindered some individuals from taking action or
using official procedures (Robinson, 1996; Epstein, 1997). Sexist harassment is
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

22 K. H. Robinson
defined as generalized sexist remarks and behaviour not necessarily designed to
elicit sexual cooperation, but rather to convey insulting, degrading, or sexist attitudes
(Fitzgerald, 1990, p. 25). As pointed out by Epstein (1997), sexist harassment
plays a significant role in maintaining the normalization of the heterosexualized
gender oppositional binary that is culturally constituted within what Judith Butler
calls the heterosexual matrix (1990).
Unless specified, quotes from students and teachers utilized in this paper are from
the research undertaken by the author, on which this paper is based. All names used
in the paper are pseudonyms.
Doing sexual harassment: doing hegemonic masculinity
Negotiating everyday gender relations in schools is a complicated and often contra-
dictory experience that warrants individuals to take up certain performances of
masculinities and femininities that are regulated and policed through the normalizing
practices of compulsory heterosexuality (Rich, 1980; Butler, 1990). Within this
context, social and educational discursive practices reinforce a particular form of
heterosexual masculinity, that is, hegemonic masculinity, that culturally dominates
and others other masculinities that are available to boys, particularly those that sit
outside heterosexuality. However, as Connell (1996, p. 76) points out, hegemonic
masculinity is not a fixed character type, always and everywhere the same. It is,
rather, the masculinity that occupies the hegemonic position in a given pattern of
gender relations, a position always contestable. Consequently, doing hegemonic
masculinity becomes a dynamic, socially and historically sanctioned performance that
is generally rewarded with power and popularity for young men in schools and the
broader community. Hegemonic masculinity is not just the form of masculinity that
is culturally dominant, signifying a position of authority, leadership, success and
being in control, but is the expression of the privilege men collectively have over
women (Connell, 1996, p. 209). This echoes Kimmels point that the very defini-
tions of manhood we have developed in our culture maintain the power that some
men have over other men and that men have over women (1994, p. 125).
Butlers notion of performativity is useful in looking at the ways boys and men who
take up the discourse of hegemonic masculinity assert their gendered subjectivities. It
is crucial to point out that the concept of gender performance is always one that is
enacted within strictly defined cultural boundaries. As defined by Butler (1994,
p. 33), performativity is that aspect of discourse that has the capacity to produce
what it names this production actually always happens through a certain kind of
repetition and recitation. Clarifying this definition she points out that performativity
is the vehicle through which ontological effects are established (1994, p. 33). Conse-
quently, the performance of hegemonic masculinity constructs and reconstructs the
hegemonic masculine subject. That is, how and where hegemonic masculinity is
played out, culturally and historically, is the way in which hegemonic masculinity gets
established, instituted, circulated and confirmed (Butler, 1994). Sexual harassment
is integral to the performance of hegemonic masculinity and is a critical expression of
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities 23
the converging power regimes of gender and heterosexist oppression. However, not
only does it maintain hierarchical heterosexual gendered relationships, but is a power-
ful means of reinforcing culturally dominant relations of gender across intersections
of class, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and so on.
However, not all boys take up hegemonic masculinity, or take it up to the same
degree as others; some shift in and out of different performances of other forms of
masculinities available to them depending on their contextual reading of the space,
situation at hand and the power relations operating. The poststructuralist notion that
individuals are shifting subjects, who are volatile, contradictory and changing, rather
than rational, unified and static beings, provides a crucial framework in understanding
the continual complexities of taking up gendered identities, as well as the complex,
contradictory and contextual practice of sexual harassment. What constitutes the
knowledge of what it means to be a boy is based on the multiple discourses of mascu-
linity that are culturally and historically available, which intersect with other sites of
identity such as race, ethnicity, class, sexuality and so on. Individual boys, who are
active agents in the construction of their own subjectivity, will locate themselves within
certain discourses of masculinities, taking up these meanings and social relationships
as their own. However, ones subjective positioning is not fixed, but can discursively
shift as individuals read their locations within relations of power, claiming or resisting
discourses according to what they want to achieve (Hollway, 1984). In the context of
gender equity programs, these issues and perspectives need to be more closely
scrutinized and applied to policy and practices in order to make realistic changes in
areas such as sexual harassment and gendered violence more broadly.
Myths, stereotypes and misconceptions surrounding sexual harassment
Many of the myths relating to sexual harassment were evident amongst the group of
male students in this research. However, their awareness of this phenomenon tended
to vary across the age groups (this was similar to girls), with many of the younger boys
in Years 7 and 8 having limited understandings of the term sexual harassment, despite
their engagement in various sexually harassing behaviours. In fact, some of the male
students believed that younger students engaged in sexual harassment more so than
older students, as typified in the following comment by a Year 8 male student:
It happens more in the younger years because in Year 7 boys think its funny that girls are
wearing bras, so they flick them and annoy them and tease them about their tits. (Richard)
However, this perspective of younger boys being involved more frequently in sexually
harassing behaviour was not generally supported by this research. Perhaps the most
significant points that can be made about differences across age groups in terms of
sexual harassment is the general increased sophistication of the behaviour with age
and a sense that older male students tend to have a greater awareness of sexual harass-
ment as a powerful tool through which to express their heterosexualized masculinity.
Three of the myths most commonly voiced by boys constituted sexual harassment
as physical behaviour that occurs predominantly between adults and is most frequently
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

24 K. H. Robinson
occurring, stereotypically, within the workforce (several younger boys actually artic-
ulated the behaviour as that occurring between a boss and his [sic] secretary). Brant
and Too (1994) in their work on sexual harassment point out that the workforce origin
of sexual harassment discourse is still so influential it is difficult to apply to other situ-
ations (p. 1). However, the dominant discourse of sexual harassment as being prima-
rily a physical phenomenon was especially prevalent amongst the boys. They generally
perceived that sexual harassment was a physical practice only and included behaviours
such as rape, having sex, touching, kissing and pinching. A few defined it even more
narrowly to be rape only. Verbal, visual or written forms of sexual harassment were
generally not considered to be part of this behaviour. It is interesting to point out here
that the most frequent form of sexual harassment experienced by girls from boys is
verbal, visual and written (Herbert, 1992; Larkin, 1994; Robinson, 1996). Conse-
quently, it is not surprising that many of the boys believed that if they did not touch
girls, then it was not sexual harassment. This perception that the practice is primarily
a physical phenomenon, legitimized and legalized in many of the boys eyes much
of the sexually harassing behaviours in which they engaged on a daily basis.
For those male students who were more aware that sexual harassment could
encompass a wide range of both physical and non-physical behaviours, many
expressed the belief that non-physical harassment was far less serious, bordering on
trivial, than if one was physically sexually harassed. This perspective is indicative of a
much more prevalent discourse that operates in society around violence more gener-
ally. The polarizing of physical and non-physical behaviours, or of mind/body expe-
riences, is often perceived across a continuum of seriousness, with physical violation
and experiences of pain often considered on the most serious and damaging end of
the scale. In addition, this polarization is reinforced through institutional educational
practices, when some teachers and administrators consider non-physical harassment
more trivial and less worthy of intervention or official deterrents (Robinson, 1996).
Non-physical sexual harassment, for example the use of derogatory sexualized
language such as slut, is so entrenched within the normalizing practices in hetero-
sexual gendered relationships and within the language of popular culture operating in
schools (and outside schools) everyday, that the perceived enormity of intervention
immobilizes many teachers. As one female teacher in this research stated, You cant
stop a snow storm with an umbrella!
Sexual harassment was also generally perceived amongst male students to be a girls
only issue, often believing that it had little relevance, if any at all, to themselves or
other boys. This was particularly so for some students in the Boys School, who
believed that it was not a problem in their school at all. There was a tone in some
students comments that reflected a sense of annoyance at their time being wasted on
talking about what they perceived to be girls stuff. Girls were considered to be the
main victims of sexual harassment and therefore it was seen as an issue that only girls
had to deal with or be concerned about. It was not generally considered a practice
where the perpetrators behaviour was a concern or needed to be problematized, thus,
ultimately distancing the problem and the responsibility from those boys engaging in
the behaviour.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities 25
Conversely, sexualized comments and behaviours experienced by some of the boys
from girls did not tend to be viewed in the same manner as the way girls often viewed
such behaviours from boys (Mahony, 1985, 1989; Kenig & Ryan, 1986; AAUW,
1993; Bryant, 1993; Robinson, 1996; Murnen & Smolak, 2000). In most instances
the boys did not feel threatened or uncomfortable by girls sexualized attention and
often welcomed the comments and touches, but rather their hegemonic masculine
identities were authenticated and reinforced through public expressions of active
heterosexuality. The public expression of hegemonic masculinity, particularly
amongst male peers, is integral to the performance of gender for these boys and
young men. Within the process of subjectification, in terms of gender identity, we
become gendered subjects from our gender performances and the performances of
others towards us (Alsop et al., 2002). Butler (1990) points out that the realness of
doing gender is in the ability to compel belief in the performance. For these young
men, the judgments of their male peers are critical to the measurement of how
authentic they are at doing their masculinity. When young men were upset by sexu-
alized comments from girls it involved the questioning of their masculinity, especially
in front of peers. This point is raised by Bordo (1997, p. 54) who highlights that
heterosexual men do not generally feel anxiety about sexualized and sexualizing
gestures from women, unless they are experienced as specifically undermining their
masculinity.
What do boys who engage in sexual harassment think about their behaviour
towards girls?
With only a few exceptions, male students supported girls claims that sexual harass-
ment was a practice that many girls, from various backgrounds and across all age
groups, experienced from boys everyday in schools. Male students, who acknowl-
edged that they engaged in sexually harassing behaviours towards girls, expressed a
number of views about the practice.
Its only a joke!
The most frequently expressed view boys gave to justify their sexually harassing
behaviours towards girls was that it was primarily a joke, a point that is reflected in
much of the research into sexual harassment in schools, as well as in other contexts
such as universities and the workforce (Mahony, 1985; Robinson, 1996; Kenway
et al., 1997). Many of the boys could not understand and did not really care about
what they considered to be girls over the top reactions to what they viewed as a bit
of fun. They believed that their behaviour was not really hurting anybody and that
girls generally liked boys mucking around with them, despite the fact that some girls
got angry. For some, sexually harassing girls was something to break the boredom of
the school day, making it more interesting. This perspective was found across all age
groups. The following are typical comments made by boys attending the public coed-
ucation schools in this research:
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

26 K. H. Robinson
Yes we do that [sexual harassment] sometimes, but its all a joke though, the boys are just
having a bit of fun. (Peter, Year 8)
Yes, boys do that [sexual harassment]. They often call girls names and they touch girls but
it is only a joke! (Will, Year 10)
Boys hassle girls a bit but its just a joke! Girls like it and some let the boys do it. (Jason,
Year 11)
Greg, a Year 10 student, acknowledged that there were a group of boys who would
often go up to girls and say, Id like to fuck you! But he was also quick to point out
that it was mostly just a joke. This perspective, that sexual harassment was primarily
enacted as a joke, was often reinforced and supported by some teachers responses to
the behaviour. They tended to view the boys behaviours as clowning around or a
silly joke, which often influenced their quick dismissal of girls complaints and rein-
forced boys negative behaviours (Kenway et al., 1997).
Many boys in this research shared the discourse raised above that girls like it
[sexual harassment] and some let the boys do it. This perspective raises a major
issue that needs to be addressed, which has crucial implications for intervention
into sexual harassment in schools. Interestingly, it is also a perspective often shared
by some teachers, which frequently resulted in blaming the victim for their
experiences. Sexual harassment is a contradictory, complex, multilayered phenome-
non, which is generally read contextually by those experiencing the behaviour
(Robinson, 2000b). Though many victims find the behaviour degrading and humil-
iating, how they react to it can be influenced by a number of contextual factors,
including, but not limited to, who the harasser is and how many; where the harass-
ment takes place; whether the victim is alone; whether there are other friends
around; and what the consequences of their own reactions to the harassment will
be. Consequently, how to react and negotiate the behaviour can be extremely
complex. Decisions to do nothing, or to play along in the hope that the behaviour
will eventually stop, are not necessarily representative of the victims passivity or
enjoyment of the behaviour or colluding in the harassment, but rather active strate-
gies, often employed quickly under stressful circumstances. The normalization of
sexual harassment in everyday heterosexual gendered relations impacts on decisions
about how one reacts to this behaviour. Young womens decisions may have signifi-
cant negative effects not just on their welfare, but on their popularity and power
amongst their peers, especially with boys, resulting in their own gender and sexual
identities being scrutinized. However, the complexity is increased when boys read
girls reactions as positive.
Whats all the fuss about, its normal!
Most boys, across all age groups, viewed sexual harassment as a normal everyday
part of their interactions with girls as expressed by James, a Year 8 student, Sure we
say and do things to girls, but no more than normal! For some boys, their behaviour
toward girls was rarely given a second thought.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities 27
Boys do things like pinch girls on the bottom, pull their hair and call them names, but no
more than normal. There is always that in any school. (Chris, Year 7)
Yes, sure, boys call girls names like tits, slut, humpy and dog. Everyone says it at some
stage or another. (Daniel, Year 7)
Jason, who perceived that girls often liked this attention from boys, commented about
why he sexually harassed girls:
Because guys sometimes have to do things to get girls attention, its in our nature and
some girls like some of these activities. (Year 11)
As can be seen from the comments above, the normalization of sexual harassment for
some boys is a major issue that continues to underpin their perceptions and practices.
Some boys perceive sexual harassment as an integral part of attracting attention from
girls and as a means for establishing possible intimate relations with them. As previ-
ously pointed out, the fine line between sexual harassment and normal and natural
heterosexual courting can often become difficult to distinguish. Some, if not all, of
these behaviours can be offensive and uncomfortable to some girls but this can
become a secondary consideration if boys perceive sexually harassing behaviours as
something they have to do in order to attract girls and as an inherent performance
of their masculinity. Engaging in such gendered performances is part of the cultural
script, which constitutes hegemonic masculinity, thus rendering the boys sexual
harassment as an appropriate form of interaction with girls in their views. Sexual
harassment becomes part of the embodiment of the performance of hegemonic
masculinity through these everyday articulated acts and gestures, constituting boys
masculine identities in the process. The perspective that sexual harassment is some-
thing they have to do becomes very real for some boys, who are aware of the conse-
quences of not getting their performance of masculinity right, including being the
subject of social punishments. However, this normalization of gendered performances
is commonly read within essentialist biological discourses of gender, even amongst the
boys themselves. The popular catch phrase, Boys will be boys is a reflection of such
biological determinist discourses of gender, which are often reinforced and reflected
in some teachers perceptions towards sexual harassment amongst students. The
belief that its in our nature has become a commonly used excuse for relinquishing
responsibility for sexual harassment and sexual violence more generally.
Research in the area of sexual violence towards women has highlighted a contin-
uum of violence, in which sexual harassment (often perceived by the broader commu-
nity to be on the less severe end of the scale), if not dealt with appropriately, can lead
to more severe cases of physical sexual violence such as rape (Kelly, 1993). Much of
the everyday sexual harassment operating in schools is discursively read as normal
and natural heterosexual male behaviour; it is often perceived as young men explor-
ing, albeit sometimes rather awkwardly and childishly, their new awareness of the
opposite sex. Consequently, much of this behaviour, if recognized at all, is dismissed
as unproblematic in the large scale of events, often becoming invisible through the
naturalization of the everydayness of these performances. Such discursive practices
reinforce and send strong messages about sexual harassment to both girls and boys.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

28 K. H. Robinson
One such message is that it is an integral and constitutive part of doing hegemonic
heterosexualized masculinity and that experiencing this behaviour is, as many girls
indicate, just a part of being a girl (Jones, 1985; Robinson, 1996); that is, part of the
performativity of dominant heterosexualized gendered relationships.
Some girls ask for it!
Some boys in this research (as did some girls and teachers) indicated that girls who
were sexually harassed generally deserved the behaviour; they asked for it through
what was perceived to be the girls own inappropriate behaviour. This inappropri-
ate behaviour was related to girls known or perceived active sexuality, frequently the
basis of rumours amongst students and often linked to their expression of self through
their choice of clothing, make-up and jewellery. Young women who performed their
femininity in this way are often read as tarty or sluttish by boys and other girls and
were generally considered fair game for sexualized comments and harassment.
Young working class women were often read in this sexualized manner (Robinson,
1992; Lees, 1993). The following comments were typical of those made by boys with
these perceptions:
They get called that because of the way they act and what they look like. They have the
reputations for being slack! (Will, Year 10)
There was a strong sense of misogyny in some boys feelings about particular girls,
which often resulted in a total lack of respect towards them and their feelings. This was
especially obvious in the following comments made by Tony, a Year 9 student, who
girls identified as someone who frequently engaged in sexually harassing behaviours:
KR: Do boys call girls names?
Tony: If theyre an ugly girl, or if theyre sort of dogs, they call them names.
KR: What makes a girl a dog?
Tony: Well, you get girls who look nice and act nice, shes not a dog! The girls you dont
like, the real tarts, well theyre dogs.
KR: What makes a girl a tart?
Tony: Shes slack, comes onto boys and fucks around.
KR: But boys do that also. Are boys slack?
Tony: No, its different for boys. Boys are supposed to come onto girls! Not the other
way round.
KR: What do the girls do when you call them names and say things to them?
Tony: They will either ignore you and continue talking to their friends, or they will give
you a look and tell you to shut up.
KR: Are you friendly with the girls?
Tony: Yes, most of them. Some girls I dont like and they dont like me and thats it.
KR: Why dont you like some girls?
Tony: Especially if the girls ugly that wont give her a head start, or if shes a slut.
This misogynous view, reflecting double standards in relation to acceptable gender
behaviour, was frequently expressed by boys in this research (Connell, 1987; Mac An
Ghaill, 1994). This anger and disdain was echoed by Kelvin, a Year 11 student, who
commented about a couple of girls who had been showing their sexual interest in him
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities 29
over several weeks, What did they see in me, the horny sluts! Some young mens
misogyny was further reflected in their sexually derogative comments directed at girls
mothers (Kehily & Nayak, 1997). This was particularly effective in disempowering
and humiliating girls, especially in front of peers.
The belief that some girls ask for it, that is, are responsible for male students
sexually harassing behaviour, was taken further by some who considered that sexual
harassment was an appropriate means of dealing with girls who made boys angry, as
depicted in the following remark by Mick, a Year 9 student:
In Year 7 this boy did it [sexual harassment] to this girl. He was grabbing her everywhere
and that and the teacher saw him. She sent him out of the room and talked to him after
class. But it wasnt all his fault, the girl was calling him a bastard and yelling at him.
If girls made some boys angry, sexual harassment was used as a powerful weapon of
retaliation to put girls back in their place as one teacher put it. This same female
teacher from a rural coeducational school talked about a sexual harassment incident
she had to deal with just prior to this interview:
T: I had an incident the other day involving three boys and a girl outside the canteen.
One young woman was sitting with her friend, when three boys from her class
started making sexual comments to her. One of the boys started thrusting his pelvis
back and forward in a sexualized manner as he threw a carton of chocolate milk in
her direction. It was a very sexually symbolic action. Apparently, the other boys
around them just watched and laughed.
KR: What did the girl do?
T: She was extremely upset as you would imagine and was quite frightened at the
action. Also, some of the milk had landed on her uniform.
KR: What did you do?
T: I spoke to the girl involved and asked her what she wanted me to do. Then I spoke
to the boys involved.
KR: Did the boy indicate why he had done it to the girl?
T: Yes. According to him, she was a snobby bitch, thought she was better than every-
one else and wanted to pull her down a peg.
Sexual harassment can operate effectively to disrupt or maintain everyday power
relations in schools between students, primarily on the basis of gender; however, it
does not necessarily stem from sexual interest in girls, as shown in the above scenario,
but can be utilized successfully to challenge power relations intersecting with other
aspects of identity. For some young men, anger, resulting from threats to their own
identities, or perceived power and status amongst peers, or challenges to their control
of certain space, both physical and intellectual, can manifest itself through a range
of tried and tested sexually harassing practices that can successfully put others back
in their place, as well as reinforce their own power and sense of self.
What will my friends say? Sexual harassment as a Male Status Builder
For some young men sexually harassing girls (and others) was part of establishing
ones hegemonic masculine status and reconfirming ones acceptance and position
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

30 K. H. Robinson
within masculine friendship groups. As identified previously, how successfully one
performs ones gender is largely determined by the performance of others towards
the individual. In this case, the critical eye and practices of other males, particularly
those located within similar discourses of masculinity, are imperative to boys
perceived acceptance, power and popularity. As Nicholas, a Year 11 student,
commented:
In earlier years of school like Years 7, 8 and 9 how you behaved in class was a status
thing. Everyone is a lot more self-conscious in Year 7; I know I was more self-conscious
and conscious of status. Boys showed their status with a lot of aggression, especially if
someone feels threatened and trying to get onto girls all the time, that sort of macho
stuff.
Gendered performances intersect intimately with relations of power. Doing hege-
monic masculinity successfully is about the embodiment of cultural norms, about
actively striving to demonstrate ones heterosexuality and power, which are integral
to the building of status and prestige for many young boys, youth and men
(Connell, 1987, 1996). Kimmel (1994, p. 133) points out that part of hegemonic
masculinity is to always be prepared to demonstrate sexual interest in women that
you meet. Still, for some young men who took up forms of masculinity that were
based far less on exaggerated performances of masculinity or public peer demonstra-
tions of power and who did not tend to engage in sexually harassing behaviours,
expressed concerns about such behaviour being sexist and socially unjust. However,
when it came to the point of making a public stand against such behaviours and
challenging their peers, most of these young men acknowledged that they would feel
uncomfortable in doing so and feared possible repercussions of harassment targeted
at them as a result. Some indicated that they felt pressured into engaging in such
behaviours themselves on occasions by their peers, despite believing that what they
were doing was wrong. As one young man indicated, I did it [sexual harassment] a
couple of times, but it was just to keep them off my back. Connells work around
masculinities highlights that the peer group, not individuals, are the bearers of
gender definitions and that boys who create trouble in a group by aggression,
disruption and harassment, that is, an exaggerated performance of hegemonic
masculinity, can be cooperative and peaceable on their own (1996, p. 220).
Kimmel (1994, p. 132) points out that in relation to males, as adolescents we learn
that our peers are a kind of gender police, constantly threatening to unmask us as
feminine, as sissies. This point is reiterated in the works of Epstein and Johnson
(1998) and Mac An Ghaill (1994) around masculinities and sexualities in schools in
England. Despite some young mens sense of injustice around sexual harassment,
their fears of being socially ostracized by their male peers as a result of challenging
the social scripts constituting hegemonic masculinity were too powerful to resist.
Thus, their conformity and lack of intervention operates only to condone and rein-
force sexual harassment as an acceptable and legitimate social practice and an inte-
gral part of the performativity of hegemonic heterosexualized gendered
relationships.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities 31
A pack of boys
As pointed out above the realness of gender performance is primarily about the ability
to compel belief in others. Thus, the perception that one is doing hegemonic mascu-
linity correctly is largely based on the critical judgements made by ones male peers.
Therefore, the hegemonic masculine collective, represented in male peer groups, is
crucial to the engagement of young men in the utilization of sexual harassment, in all
its manifestations, as a measure of the realness of their gendered performances. This
performance of hegemonic masculinity is indicative of a power relation that has critical
implications for interventions into sexual harassment and sexual violence more gener-
ally. I started this paper outlining one of several recent gang rape cases that occurred
in Australia in recent times. It is within such manifestations of hegemonic masculine
collective power against girls and women, and against boys and men who step outside
of its boundaries that highlight both the extremities of the power relations amongst the
young men involved in these practices, as well as the collective expectations of what
constitutes a real performance of hegemonic masculinity. It is through such practices
that hegemonic masculine identities are constituted and the collective peer group
culture is consolidated. Pryor et al. (1995) point out that sexist humour increased
group cohesion amongst men who engaged in sexual harassment. Other researchers
have also identified such links between sexist humour and harassment, indicating that
it is part of consolidating male peer group cultures and more specifically heterosexual
masculinities (Lyman, 1987; Kehily & Nayak, 1997). However, there is other research
which links sexist humour and harassment with more aggressive hostile attitudes and
behaviours towards women, such as rape supportive attitudes, sexually coercive behav-
iours and courtship violence (Ryan & Kanjorski, 1998).
Kimmel, discussing masculinity as a homosocial enactment, adds we [men] test
ourselves, perform heroic feats, take enormous risks, all because we want other men
to grant us manhood (1994, p. 129). In this process of identity women become a
kind of currency that men use to improve their ranking on the masculine scale
(Kimmel, 1994, p. 129). The ways in which masculinities are played out for other
men has also been highlighted in other research (Connell, 1987, 1995; Mac An
Ghaill, 1994; Kenway & Fitzclarence, 1997). Mac An Ghaill (1994), in his study of
young men, stressed that within the collective peer identity of male students, part of
striving for masculinity included misogynous boasting and telling and retelling
sexual performance stories. Connell (1996) points out that groups of boys engage in
these practices [violence and sexual harassment], not because they are driven to it by
raging hormones, but in order to acquire or defend privilege, to mark difference and
to gain pleasure (p. 220).
The pressure young men experience in conforming to the male collective peer iden-
tity was highlighted in this research, on occasions, not just through young mens
voices, but through young womens experiences of sexual harassment. Some young
women relayed that their trust in friendships with young men was often undermined
when their male friends participated in the harassment they experienced. Some young
men whom young women considered to be friends changed dramatically when they
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

32 K. H. Robinson
were with male peers, as indicated in the following comment by a young woman in
Year 11 at an urban coeducation high school:
Girls get called stuff like that all the time. That stuff really hurts. But mostly the guys are
usually OK by themselves, but if you get a group of guys together they can be really nasty,
they yell things at you as you walk past them in the playground. They really talk to some
of the girls badly, like calling them humpies or sluts. I just hate walking past groups of boys
or men; they just change when they all get together. Some I thought were my friends. (Sarah)
Lees (1993, p. 169), adding further weight to this argument, makes the point that
much of a boys group solidarity is based on collective denigration of girls who may
even be their friends. As pointed out previously, young men have a variety of subject
positions open to them and their location in discourses of masculinities and sexual
harassment may vary contextually, thus shifting and creating contradictions, as they
weigh up personal consequences for such positionings. It is the shifting, changing and
contradictions surrounding individual subjects that warrant greater understanding
when it comes to strategies for interventions into sexual harassment.
Doing masculinity differently: male students challenging sexual harassment
of girls
There were several young men in this research, desiring to invest in alternative mascu-
linities, who successfully confronted their concerns and fears of engaging in different
performances of masculinity and heterosexuality, or non-heterosexuality. Conse-
quently, they built different gendered relations of power with their female and male
peers. However, for most, this process was neither easy nor totally free from harass-
ment. They often experienced severe harassment particularly from those boys and
young men whose gendered identities were challenged and compromised by different
performances of masculinity, such as performances not based on rigid gender bina-
ries, aggression, exclusion and powering over the other. Their resistance was often
in the form of actively disrupting and challenging gendernormative behaviours,
including sexual harassment, homophobia and heterosexism directed towards girls
and other men and boys. This is reflected in Stevens comments, a Year 9 student
from a coeducation school:
Steven: I dont get into doing that stuff; it just makes you look stupid in the end. I get
along with the girls and I like that. Im really good friends with some of the girls.
I tell the guys to back off sometimes and that its just stupid, but you have to be
willing to wear the abuse you get back as you end up copping a lot of flack your-
self. They see you sticking up for girls and poofs against them and they dont like
that much.
KR: How does that make you feel?
Steven: It worried me a bit, but theyre just stupid. They keep calling me poof and fag
but I just ignore them now and get on with it. Some days are worse than others
and it gets you down more but thats OK.
Paul, another Year 9 student, also on occasions found himself the target of aggres-
sion from a particular group of Year 10 boys as a result of his doing masculinity
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities 33
differently and for building supportive and equitable relationships with young
women. Paul had an avid and active interest in ballet and contemporary dance, an
image which was not incorporated into hegemonic masculinity within his working
class school, and spent most of his time in his female dominated friendship group.
This transgression from hegemonic masculinity resulted in Paul being perceived as
not being a real boy as his gender performance did not constitute many of the regu-
latory norms considered crucial to hegemonic masculine identity, such as involve-
ment in aggressive competitive sports, upholding the primacy of the male friendship
group, the public expression of ones active heterosexuality, and the powering over
the Other. As a result, Paul was often referred to as a girl or a poofter by some of
the Year 10 boys in particular. However, the fact that Paul had a girlfriend, one who
was popular in the school, challenged this perception that he was not a real boy on
the most important defining point in this regard, his heterosexuality. Consequently,
he tended to escape much of the harassment that some other boys experienced, who
transgressed hegemonic masculinity, and who were not involved with popular
students or in a publicly acknowledged heterosexual relationship. Paul comments
about his experiences:
Paul: Im not into football and that, I enjoy dancing even though Ive been given a lot of
flack for it. Ive been doing it for a while now, Ive been in school musicals and Im
good at it you know. My girlfriend does it too and we practice together sometimes.
I like doing that stuff. Some boys think its girly, I get called poofter sometimes but
I dont care. Its OK.
KR: What do the girls think?
Paul: They dont care. They think its great, they like dancing with me. We all get along
OK.
In terms of Butlers theory of performativity, it is the repetitiveness of the gender
performance that both constitutes the realness of gender (in that it conforms to regu-
latory norms), as well as providing a means through which different meanings of gender
are made possible (Butler, 1990, 1993). The repetitions of gender are not stable and
within different contexts and times a repetition can take on a different meaning, under-
mining and subverting the dominant norms (Alsop et al., 2002, p. 103). Conse-
quently, challenges to rigid gender binaries constituted within heteronormative
relationships in recent times, have provided a context in which different performances
of masculinity and femininity are made possible. Young men like Steven and Paul,
who take up and engage in more subordinate masculinities, not only destabilize the
regulatory norms allowing for shifts in masculine identities to occur, but allow for a
space in which different and more equitable power relationships between boys and
girls can emerge and develop; that is, gendered performances that are not for example,
constituted through sexually harassing behaviours.
Intersections between ethnicity, gender and sexual harassment
How ethnicity, race, sexuality, class and other sites of difference intersect with
power and gender in the practice of sexual harassment, either within the context of
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

34 K. H. Robinson
the perpetrators motivations or the victims experiences, is an issue that warrants
greater focus in the research on this behaviour. In addition, how these sites of power
intersect with gender in sexual assault cases, such as those raised in the introduction,
also need further investigation. In relation to sexual harassment, there has been some
notable research (see hooks, 1990; Collins, 1991; Bhattacharyya, 1994; Brant & Too,
1994; Kitzinger, 1994; Epstein, 1997; St Jean & Feagin, 1997; Wen-Chu Chen,
1997) that has dealt with such intersections but to date, the vast literature on sexual
harassment has not fully explored the multi-layered complexities that exist within this
phenomenon. Wen-Chu Chen (1997), in relation to her research on the sexual
harassment experiences of Asian-American women, argues that:
Racial inequality is as much a dimension of the sexual harassment experiences of Asian-
American women as is gender inequality. White and non-Asian men, holding stereotyped
notions of Asian-American women, may subject Asian-American women to more extreme
sexist attitudes and behaviors, which the men would not expect from their white or non-
Asian counterparts. (p. 59)
The complexities of the interactions between race, ethnicity and gender operating
in sexual harassment were frequently identified in the experiences relayed by
students and teachers in the schools in this research. Several Asian-Australian
young women indicated that they had experienced sexual harassment from some
non-Asian white boys and men, who couched their sexualized comments in stereo-
types about Asian women being compliant and eager to sexually please men with
a range of exotic sexual acts. One Asian-Australian young woman commented:
This guy keeps saying to me and my friend that he saw this Asian movie and wants
to know if all Asian girls are willing to do wild things in bed like the woman in the
movie.
However, for some teachers in this research, ethnicity was a factor that determined
their perceptions of who the perpetrators of sexual harassment were. Some teachers
were quick to identify boys from Middle-Eastern and Arabic backgrounds as the most
likely and frequent perpetrators of sexual harassment, as they were perceived to be
from chauvinistic cultures that had little respect for women (Robinson, 2000a).
However, this perspective was not generally supported in this research, but rather
tended to indicate that such stereotypes were so strong they often overshadowed the
recognition of the sexually harassing behaviours of boys from white, Anglo-Saxon
backgrounds or those from other ethnic minority groups. Within this stereotype
Middle-Eastern and Arabic ethnicities and cultures are homogenized, especially
around gendered relationships.
The complexities of the relationship between race, ethnicity and gender were
highlighted in the comments of several male teachers working in high schools with
high proportions of boys from ethnic minority backgrounds. These teachers indicated
that boys from certain minority backgrounds were more likely to make sexual sugges-
tions to girls who were from Anglo-Australian backgrounds, than girls from their own
cultural background. According to these teachers, this was primarily due to two
reasons: firstly, they tended to have more respect for the virginity and purity of
women from their own cultures, as these women were likely to be their future wives
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities 35
and the mothers of their children and in their culture this was extremely important;
and secondly, the perception that many white Australian girls were easy sexual
targets. The stereotype that white Australian girls were sexually easy compared to
other girls, was echoed in the comments of several young men from minority back-
grounds, but to what extent this was influential on their potential engagement in sexu-
ally harassing behaviours towards them is not possible to tell. However, as pointed
out by Wen-Chu Chen (1997) and the young Asian-Australian woman above, stereo-
types constituted in powerful discourses that construct understandings about differ-
ent cultures can be highly influential in the practice of sexual harassment and how it
is read.
Conclusion
This paper raises a number of crucial issues around constructions of hegemonic
masculinities and sexual harassment that have important implications for schooling,
policies and practices in the area of gender equity. It also raises concerns about the
effectiveness of policies and intervention practices around sexual harassment over the
past two decades. There is an urgent need for more research into sexual harassment
in schooling, particularly in terms of current policy and intervention strategies, as well
as where the issue fits into new broader gender equity policies. It is believed that the
current work that schools are undertaking in dealing with gender equity issues needs
to ensure that sexual harassment and gendered violence is a major priority concern
that is substantially addressed. With the political shift in focus, nationally and inter-
nationally, towards dealing primarily with the concerns of boys, there is a strong
possibility that sexual harassment, perceived as a girls only issue, will drop off the
school gender equity agenda altogether. It is crucial that intervention strategies are
based on deconstructing discourses of hegemonic masculinity that limit the options
of gendered identities open to young men (and young women) and perpetuate power-
ful cultural binaries such as male/female and heterosexual/non-heterosexual that
operate to radically and aggressively exclude the Other. There needs to be an on-
going commitment by schools and the broader community to educational programs
that focus on increasing the credibility and status of alternative forms of masculinities,
including non-heterosexual masculinities, which are based on less aggressive, violent
and exaggerated performances of powering over others. Within this context, it is also
crucial to increase understandings of how young men individually and collectively
negotiate relationships within their male friendship groups and how this intimately
intersects with power, status, what it means to be a male and their involvement in
collective sexual violence. Finally, it is believed that intervention strategies associ-
ated with sexual harassment and sexual violence more generally, will be more effec-
tive if they include an understanding of individuals as shifting subjects who are
irrational and contradictory and constantly negotiating and renegotiating their
discursive maneuvers. Educators need to develop ways to be able to positively tap
into young mens desires to take chances in placing their investments in alternative
forms of masculinities.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

36 K. H. Robinson
References
Alsop, R., Fitzsimons, A. & Lennon, K. (2002) Theorizing gender (Cambridge, Polity).
American Association of University Women (1993) Hostile hallways: the AAUW survey on sexual
harassment in Americas schools (Washington, DC, AAUW).
Bhattacharyya, G. (1994) Offence is the best defence?pornography and racial violence, in:
C. Brant & Y. L. Too (Eds) Rethinking sexual harassment (London, Pluto Press).
Bordo, S. (1997) Can a woman harass a man? Towards a cultural understanding of bodies and
power, Philosophy Today,Spring, 5166.
Brant, C. & Too, Y. L (1994) Introduction, in: C. Brant & Y. L. Too (Eds) Rethinking sexual
harassment (London, Pluto Press).
Bryant, A. (1993) Hostile hallways: the AAUW survey on sexual harassment in Americas school,
Journal of School Health, 63, 355357.
Butler, J. (1990) Gender trouble: feminism and the subversion of identity (New York, Routledge).
Butler, J. (1993) Bodies that matter: on the discursive limits of sex (New York, Routledge).
Butler, J. (1994) Gender as performance: an interview with Judith Butler, Radical Philosophy, 67,
3239.
Collins, P. H. (1991) Black feminist thought (New York, Routledge).
Connell, R. W. (1987) Gender and power (Sydney, George Allen & Unwin).
Connell, R. W. (1995) Masculinities (Cambridge, Polity).
Connell, R. W. (1996) Teaching the boys: new research on masculinity, and gender strategies for
schools, Teachers College Record, 98(2), 206235.
Crichton, S. (2002) Laughs and a fight as men found guilty of gang rape, Sydney Morning Herald,8
June, 2.
Epstein, D. (1997) Keeping them in their place: hetero/sexist harassment, gender and the
enforcement of heterosexuality, in: A. M. Thomas & C. Kitzinger (Eds) Sexual harassment:
contemporary feminist perspectives (Buckingham, Open University Press).
Epstein, D. & Johnson, R. (1998) Schooling sexualities (Buckingham, Open University Press).
Farley, L. (1978) Sexual shakedown: the sexual harassment of women on the job (New York, Mc Graw
Hill).
Fitzgerald, L. F. (1990) Sexual harassment: the definition and measurement of a construct, in:
M. A. Paludi (Ed.) Ivory power: sexual harassment on campus (Albany, State University of New
York Press).
Halson, J. (1991) Young women, sexual harassment and heterosexuality: violence, power relations
and mixed-sex schooling, in: P. Abbott & C. Wallace (Eds) Gender, power and sexuality
(London, Macmillan).
Herbert, C. (1992) Sexual harassment in schools: a guide for teachers (London, David Fulton).
Hollway, W. (1984) Gender difference and the production of subjectivity, in: J. Henriques,
W. Hollway, C. Urwin, C. Venn & V. Walkerdine (Eds) Changing the subject: psychology, social
regulation and subjectivity (London, Methuen).
hooks, b. (1990) Yearning: race, gender and cultural politics (Boston, South End Press).
Jones, C. (1985) Sexual tyranny: male violence in a mixed secondary school, in: G. Weiner (Ed.)
Just a bunch of girls (Milton Keynes, Open University Press).
Jones, C. & Mahony, P. (Eds) (1989) Learning our lines: sexuality and social control in education
(London, Womens Press).
Kehily, M. J. & Nayak, A. (1997) Lads and laughter: humour and the production of heterosexual
hierarchies, Gender and Education, 9(1), 6987.
Kelly, L. (1993) Surviving sexual violence (Cambridge, Polity Press).
Kenig, S. & Ryan, J. (1986) Sex differences in levels of tolerance and attribution of blame for
sexual harassment on a university campus, Sex Roles, 15, 535549.
Kenway, J. & Fitzclarence, L. (1997) Masculinity, violence and schooling: challenging poisonous
pedagogies, Gender and Education, 9(1), 117133.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4

Reinforcing hegemonic masculinities 37
Kenway, J., Willis, S., Blackmore, J. & Rennie, L. (1997) Answering back: girls, boys and feminism in
schools (Sydney, Allen & Unwin).
Kimmel, M. S. (1994) Masculinity as homophobia: fear, shame, and silence in the construction of
gender identity, in: H. Brod & M. Kaufman (Eds) Theorizing masculinities (Thousand Oaks,
Sage).
Kitzinger, C. (1994) Anti-lesbian harassment, in: C. Brant & Y. L. Too (Eds) Rethinking sexual
harassment (London, Pluto Press).
Larkin, J. (1994) Sexual harassment: high school girls speak out (Toronto, Second Story Press).
Lees, S. (1986) Losing out: sexuality and adolescent girls (London, Penguin Books).
Lees, S. (1993) Sugar and spice: sexuality and adolescent girls (London, Penguin Books).
Lyman, P. (1987) The fraternal bond as a joking relationship: a case study of the role of sexist
jokes in male group bonding, in: M. S. Kimmel (Ed.) Changing men: new directions in research
on men and masculinity (Newbury Park, CA, Sage).
Mahony, P. (1983) How Alices chin really came to be pressed against her foot: sexist
processes of interaction in mixed-sex classrooms, Womens Studies International Forum, 6(1),
107115.
Mahony, P. (1985) Schools for the boys? (London, Hutchinson in association with The Explorations
in Feminism Collective).
Mahony, P. (1989) Sexual violence and mixed schools, in: C. Jones & P. Mahony (Eds) Learning
our lines: sexuality and social control in education (London, The Womens Press).
Mac an Ghaill, M. (1994) The making of men: masculinities, sexualities and schooling (Buckingham,
Open University Press).
Murnen, S. K. & Smolak, L. (2000) The experience of sexual harassment among grade-school
students: Early socialization of female subordination?, Sex Roles, 43(1/2), 117.
Pryor, L. (2002) Gang rape sentence harshest in decades, Sydney Morning Herald,17 August, 4.
Pryor, J. B., Giedd, J. L. & Williams, K. B. (1995) A social psychological model for predicting
sexual harassment, Journal of Social Issues, 51, 6984.
Rich, A. (1980) Compulsory heterosexuality and lesbian existence, Signs: Journal of Women in
Culture and Society, 5, 631660.
Robinson, K. H. (1992) Classroom discipline: power, resistance and gender. A look at teacher
perspectives, Gender and Education, 4(3), 273287.
Robinson, K. H. (1996) Sexual harassment in secondary schools, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Department
of Sociology, University of New South Wales, Australia.
Robinson, K. H. (2000a) Great tits miss!: the silencing of male students sexual harassment of
female teachers in secondary schools. A focus on gendered authority, Discourse: Studies in the
Cultural Politics of Education, 21(1), 7590.
Robinson, K. H. (2000b) Sexual harassment in schools: dealing with the three cscomplexities,
contexts and contradictions, paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in
Education Annual Conference, 47 December, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Ryan, K. M. & Kanjorski, J. (1998) The enjoyment of sexist humour, rape attitudes, and relation-
ship aggression in college students, Sex Roles, 38(9/10), 745756.
Sheehan, P. (2001) Tolerant, multicultural Sydney can face this difficult truth, Sydney Morning
Herald, 29 August, 20.
St Jean, Y. & Feagin, J. R. (1997) Black women, sexism, and racism, in: C. R. Ronai,
B. A. Zsembik, & J. R. Feagin (Eds) Everyday sexism in the third millennium (New York,
Routledge).
Wen-Chu Chen, E. (1997) Sexual harassment from the perspective of Asian-American women, in:
C. R. Ronai, B. A. Zsembik & J. R. Feagin (Eds) Everyday sexism in the third millennium (New
York, Routledge).
Williams, P. (2001, August 15) Letter to the editor, Sydney Morning Herald, August, p. 12.
Yusuf, I. (2001, August 15) Letter to the editor, Sydney Morning Herald, August, p. 12.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
K
S
U

K
e
n
t

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
]

a
t

2
0
:
2
4

2
3

J
u
l
y

2
0
1
4