Exam 54: N.Ann Davis

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -Davis argues that all forms of sexual harassment should be punished in the same way.

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -Davis claims that gender roles and social expectations contribute to the prevalence of sexual harassment on campus. What is Davis's argument for this claim? Is Davis's argument convincing? Why or why not?

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act made sex discrimination illegal in all universities receiving federal money.

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -According to Davis, one of the most serious and blatant forms of sexual harassment is:

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -According to survey data cited by Davis, less than 25% of female college students report having been sexually harassed by a professor.

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -According to survey data cited by Davis, sexual harassment on college campuses is:

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -Are there any ways universities can decrease sexual harassment on campus beyond the recommendations Davis gives?

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -According to Davis, all forms of sexual harassment may be morally wrong, but they are wrong for different reasons.

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -Davis claims that sexual harassment harms not only its direct victims, but also other women and society at large. What is Davis argument for this claim? Is Davis's argument convincing? Why or why not?

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -According to Davis, sexual harassment causes significant damage not only to its direct victims, but also to other women and society at large.

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -According to Davis, men often tend to understand sexual harassment:

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -Are there any factors contributing to on-campus sexual harassment that Davis overlooks?

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -What policy recommendations does Davis give to help universities decrease sexual harassment incidents? Does Davis make a compelling case for these recommendations? Why or why not?

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -Davis identifies __________ as contributing to the myth that women are themselves to blame for sexual harassment.

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -In light of the problems Davis lays out, how would you define sexual harassment?

N. Ann Davis: Sexual Harassment in the University In "Sexual Harassment in the University," N. Ann Davis discusses some of the factors that have contributed to the persistent problem of sexual harassment on college campuses. Such a discussion is of crucial importance in Davis's view because formulating effective policies to curtail sexual harassment depends on understanding why sexual harassment has been so prevalent on college campuses in the first place. The factors Davis discusses fall into two categories, the first having to do with how sexual harassment is defined. Providing a satisfactory definition of sexual harassment is challenging in several ways according to Davis. On the one hand, the definition needs to be broad enough to cover the variety of inappropriate behaviors-ranging from blatant quid pro quo cases and actual sexual assault to inappropriate sexual remarks-that sexual harassment is understood to include. But broad definitions also obscure the important distinctions that exist between the various behaviors they include. For although the included behaviors may all be wrong, they are wrong for different reasons and to different degrees, and these differences matter to how we morally assess them as well as how we craft policies to prevent them. The second factor Davis discusses is the widespread ignorance about the actual extent of on-campus sexual harassment due to under-reporting. Davis discusses several reasons why sexual harassment incidents go unreported, beginning with the unequal power between professors and students. Because of the power and social standing of professors on campus, students will often fear being disbelieved, punished, or ridiculed for reporting faculty misconduct. These fears are magnified by sexist social attitudes and beliefs about gender that excuse male misconduct as either unserious or the fault of the victim. Davis also notes how the structural organization and administrative bureaucracy of universities, which students often experience as confusing, intimidating, and impersonal, do not help to make reporting any more likely. Finally, Davis describes how many faculty members are reluctant to get involved and take action against colleagues accused of misconduct. Davis discusses several reasons for this including loyalty to colleagues, indifference, and fear of retaliation. -Davis argues that broad definitions of sexual harassments like the one given in the Equal Opportunity Commission's guidelines: