Griff Tester, An Intersectional Analysis of Sexual Harassment in Housing

Rigel C. Oliveri, Sexual Harassment of Low-Income Women in Housing: Pilot Study Results

Abstract

In recent months, high-profile and influential figures in media, government, and entertainment have been brought down by credible allegations that they have engaged in sexual misconduct. These revelations have sparked an important national discussion about the prevalence of sexual harassment in American society and the ways in which powerful people can use their positions both to exploit their vulnerable targets and to escape the consequences of their actions.

The conversation is a necessary starting point, but the focus on high-status workplaces overlooks other contexts in which sexual harassment occurs. This Article focuses on one overlooked, significant national problem: the sexual harassment and exploitation of low-income women by their landlords. Many published cases have dealt with the phenomenon, and the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has filed many complaints against alleged harassers. Good academic articles in legal and social science literature also exist that discuss the subject from a largely theoretical perspective.4 But something crucial is missing: data. Unlike sexual harassment in the workplace, which has been exhaustively studied by academics of every stripe, there have been no reliable empirical studies about the nature and prevalence of sexual harassment in housing.

Continental Can Co., Inc. v. State, 297 N.W.2d 241 (Minn. 1980)

Continental Can Co., Inc. v. State, 297 N.W.2d 241 (Minn. 1980) was the first coworker harassment case brought by Willie Ruth Hawkins, an African American woman who worked at the Continental Can Company in Eagan, Minnesota.

Starting in December of 1974, three of Hawkins’ white male co-workers repeatedly made explicit, sexually derogatory remarks and verbal sexual advances to Hawkins and touched her sexually. One of her coworkers, Cliff Warling, made racist and sexually abusive comment to Hawkins. Warling and other male coworkers told her that “a female has no  business in a factory” and “if a female would work [in] a factory, she has to be a tramp.”

Hawkins repeatedly complained to her supervisor but Continental did nothing. One supervisor told Hawkins that there was nothing he could do and that she had to expect that kind of behavior when working with men. In October 1975, the harassment of Hawkins escalated to physical violence. Warling approached Hawkins from behind while she was bending over and grabbed her between the legs. Hawkins complained immediately, but again Continental did nothing. A few days later, Hawkins’ husband came to the plant and confronted Warling, who denied the incident. When Mr. Hawkins returned later that evening to escort his wife home, they discovered that her car headlights were broken. Relations between the Hawkins and her coworkers deteriorated further, culminating in a coworker threatening Willie Ruth Hawkins with a gun in front of her children.

At that point, the Hawkins solicited the support of New Way Community Center and the Urban League, who threatened boycotts and adverse publicity if Continental did not respond. Continental then suspended two of the  harassers and held a plant meeting to inform all employees that Continental would not tolerate verbal or physical sexual harassment and discrimination. Fearing for her safety, Hawkins did not return to work and was later fired. She brought a lawsuit under state law and won, creating a precedent for the important principle that employer tolerance of hostile environment harassment by coworkers was sex discrimination.

Williams v. New York City Housing Authority, 61 A.D.3d 62 (1st Dep’t 2009)

Williams v. New York City Housing Authority, 61 A.D.3d 62 (1st Dep’t 2009) established that the legal standard in New York City is not whether the harassing conduct was “severe or pervasive” but when looking at how someone is treated has that person been treated “less well” because of their gender. Thus, under the New York City Human Rights Law, conduct need not be “severe or pervasive” to constitute a hostile work environment, but instead the analysis is one of differential treatment and whether a victim has been treated “less well” than other employees in the workplace due to gender. In New York City a violation is defined as more than “petty slights and trivial inconveniences.” This standard was adopted into New York state law in 2019.

Race-ing Justice, En-Gendering Power: Essays on Anita Hill, Clarence Thomas, and the Construction of Social Reality, edited by Toni Morrison (1993)

Race-ing Justice, En-Gendering Power: Essays on Anita Hill, Clarence Thomas, and the Construction of Social Reality, edited by Toni Morrison (1993).

“It was perhaps the most wretchedly aspersive race and gender scandal of recent times: the dramatic testimony of Anita Hill at the Senate hearings on the confirmation of Clarence Thomas as Supreme Court Justice. Yet even as the televised proceedings shocked and galvanized viewers not only in this country but the world over, they cast a long shadow on essential issues that define America.

In Race-ing Justice, En-gendering Power, Toni Morrison contributes an introduction and brings together eighteen provocative essays, all but one written especially for this book, by prominent and distinguished academicians—black and white, male and female. These writings powerfully elucidate not only the racial and sexual but also the historical, political, cultural, legal, psychological, and linguistic aspects of a signal and revelatory moment in American history.

With contributions by:
Homi K. Bhabha, Margaret A. Burnham, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Paula Giddings, A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr., Claudia Brodsky Lacour, Wahneema Lubiano, Manning Marable, Nellie Y. McKay, Toni Morrison, Nell Irvin Painter, Gayle Pemberton, Andrew Ross, Christine Stansell, Carol M. Swain, Michael Thelwell, Kendall Thomas, Cornel West, Patricia J. Williams”

Anita Hill, Speaking Truth to Power (1998)

Anita Hill, Speaking Truth to Power (1998)

“After her astonishing testimony in the Clarence Thomas hearings, Anita Hill ceased to be a private citizen and became a public figure at the white-hot center of an intense national debate on how men and women relate to each other in the workplace. That debate led to ground-breaking court decisions and major shifts in corporate policies that have had a profound effect on our lives–and on Anita Hill’s life. Now, with remarkable insight and total candor, Anita Hill reflects on events before, during, and after the hearings, offering for the first time a complete account that sheds startling new light on this watershed event.

Only after reading her moving recollection of her childhood on her family’s Oklahoma farm can we fully appreciate the values that enabled her to withstand the harsh scrutiny she endured during the hearings and for years afterward. Only after reading her detailed narrative of the Senate Judiciary proceedings do we reach a new understanding of how Washington–and the media–rush to judgment. And only after discovering the personal toll of this wrenching ordeal, and how Hill copes, do we gain new respect for this extraordinary woman.

Here is a vitally important work that allows us to understand why Anita Hill did what she did, and thereby brings resolution to one of the most controversial episodes in our nation’s history.”

The Women’s Movement Against Sexual Harassment (Cambridge University Press)

The Women’s Movement Against Sexual Harassment examines how a diverse grassroots social movement created public policy on sexual harassment in the 1970s and 1980s. The collaboration of women from varying racial, economic, and geographic backgrounds strengthened the movement by representing the perspectives and activism of a broad range of women. Based on interviews and voluminous original research, this book is the first to show how the movement against sexual harassment fundamentally changed American life in ways that continue to advance women’s opportunities today.