industry & research
campusreview.com.au
Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission saw a
32 per cent increase in sexual harassment-related complaints.
It attributed this to greater public awareness of this issue, owing
to media attention.
By contrast, in the US, Clancy’s home nation, its extent
is known. A recent report by the US National Academies of
Science, Engineering, and Medicine shows that more than half of
those surveyed have been sexually harassed. This renders STEM’s
sexual harassment rate second only to that of the military. Added
to this, the survey was launched in 2016, pre #MeToo, meaning
there were likely fewer reports of this nature.
The report defines sexual harassment as one of three
behaviours: gender-related bias, unwanted sexual attention
or sexual coercion. These behaviours can occur directly or
ambiently; that is, as part of the general environment.
Importantly, the report authors note that “research has shown
that even low-frequency incidents of sexual harassment can have
negative consequences, and that these women’s experiences
are statistically distinguishable from women who experienced no
sexual harassment”.
“Gender harassment … which tends to occur at higher
frequencies … can have similar effects as unwanted sexual
attention and sexual coercion.”
The authors further assert that STEM study and employment
conditions make it easier for sexual harassment to occur. Factors
like it being historically male-dominated, its hierarchical nature,
and its frequently isolated working environments can allow
sexual inappropriateness to flourish unchecked.
They collectively deem these factors “organisational”. This,
they say, can be viewed somewhat positively, because it “means
that institutions can take concrete steps to reduce sexual
harassment by making system-wide changes”.
Evans-Galea agrees that organisational factors are to blame,
adding that universities and research institutions’ short-term
approaches to employment, like three-year grant funding,
exacerbate this. It also doesn’t help that women remain
a solid minority: females comprise just 16 per cent of the
STEM workforce.
In a submission to the 2016–17 parliamentary inquiry into
gender segregation in the workplace, trade union Professionals
Australia detailed women’s specific experiences of sexual
harassment in STEM, perhaps due to organisational factors.
“A lot of scientists like cute student girls and are more likely to
offer them assistance or opportunities,” one said.
“As a young woman, comments were made which made me
uncomfortable, but I was expected to be a ‘good sport’,” offered
another.
Decades ago, however, the organisational culture in STEM
was even more explicitly toxic. Evans-Galea was ensnared
in it in the year 2000, when she fell pregnant while doing a
postdoctoral fellowship at the University of Utah, and was told
not to return to work.
“I was mentored by another woman. Without that, and
knowing what had happened was very, very wrong, I don’t
know if I would’ve had the courage to step up and voice [my
concerns],” she says.
“I was scared about stepping up, but [after doing it] I felt
empowered.
“That’s what I would love to see for every person in an
organisation.” n
SUBSCRIBE FOR LESS
THAN $2 A WEEK
THE LATEST NEWS AND RESOURCES FOR
HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS
Nursing Review is essential reading for
anyone involved in the healthcare sector in
Australia. It provides unrivalled coverage of
specialist topics from features and opinion
pieces, to international news and profiles.
• Latest news and resources for all health
care professionals
• Comprehensive coverage of a diversity
of topics
• Analysis of the major issues facing the
health sector as a whole
• Delivered free of charge
• 6 issues per year
• Only publication in the country dedicated
to reporting issues important to nurses
Please call 02 9936 8666 or email subs@apned.com.au to find out more.
17